
Name: Jerome Lynch
Age: 34
Affiliation: University of Michigan
Jerry Lynch is proud of his profession. He likes to point out, for instance, that the U.S. has more than 600,000 bridges, and that failures are extremely rare. “We have a very, very good track record,” he says. “We’re a diligent bunch, civil engineers.” But when something does fail, seriously bad things happen—like when the I-35W bridge collapsed in Minneapolis in 2007 and killed 13 people due to faulty gusset plates used to join load-bearing beams. It’s these catastrophic failures that motivate Lynch, an engineering professor at the University of Michigan, to think incessantly about how things come together and how to keep them from coming apart.
His solution to structural failures like the one that befell I-35W bridge is a “sensor skin” that continuously monitors weak spots and alerts inspectors to problems before they become dangerous. “Wouldn’t it be great if we could see big structural failures coming ahead of time?” he says.
Today, the few bridges in the U.S. that have any kind of sensors usually only track seismic activity, largely because it’s so expensive to wire a bridge with enough equipment to monitor multiple threats. “The Golden Gate Bridge is over a mile long,” Lynch says. “The special conduit needed can be $10 a foot, and one sensor can cost thousands.” So instead, engineers typically rely on visual inspections at two-year intervals.
Lynch’s sensors attach to wireless nodes that communicate with other nodes on the bridge, process the data on their own, and relay potential problems back to the local inspector’s office using a cellular data connection. Each sensor consists of polymer sheets up to a foot square and just a few microns thick that cover key structural elements, like the gusset plates that gave way in Minneapolis. At programmed intervals or on command from an inspector, a small microprocessor can send an electric current through the conductive carbon nanotubes embedded in the sheets, while electrodes gauge electrical resistance to detect strain, corrosion, load and dozens of other indications of stress. Hotspots are displayed on a computerized map of the bridge. Lynch doesn’t know yet how much each sensor will cost, but just the fact that they’re wireless will make them cheaper to deploy than today’s sensors and will eliminate the costs associated with unnecessary inspections.
Lynch knows about using time wisely. The Queens, New York, native earned a master’s degree and a Ph.D. in civil engineering from Stanford University and then went back and got another master’s, in electrical engineering. After 9/11, he launched a company to build wireless infrastructure sensors and left it to teach at Michigan, where he was named Professor of the Year his second year on the job. “Dr. Lynch is probably the most regarded scholar among his peers in such an early stage of a career,” says Kincho Law, a professor of structural engineering at Stanford.
Lynch’s sensing skin will leave the lab next year for testing on three highway bridges in Michigan and three bridges in Korea. And he is already working on a paint-based version that could be applied to anything that needs monitoring, from airplanes to pipelines, as well as a version that would make its own power from the vibrations of whatever it’s painted on. “There’s an inherent uncertainty in visual inspections,” Lynch says. “We need better tools to keep an eye on things.” —Mike Haney
Stay up to date on the latest news of the future of science and technology from your iPhone with full articles, images and offline viewing
Featuring every article from the magazine and website, plus links from around the Web. Also see our PopSci DIY feed
Share links with friends, comment on stories and more
In our December issue, Popular Science names the 100 best innovations of the year: bombproof wallpaper, self-parking cars, the fastest helicopter, and 97 more. Plus inventor profiles and videos.
Check out the best of what's new here.
I enjoyed the article, but was disappointed at first, because whomever posted (or wrote) it, did not bother to proof read it. The subject person featured, is introduced as "Michael Strand (also under the photo), but the whole article is about Michael Strano. I assume, for research purposes, the latter is accurate.
I know how!
When I was litle saw Star Wars too, but I was impress from the flying machines and now I'm able to make "Snow-Speeder" for example!!! And I have some ideas for new materials and way for fly including revolutionary engines...
Need only MONEY!!!
Lextir: These are called "typos" in the language of writers. "Typo" stands for typographical error. Errors are often defined as "common mistakes". Mistaking the name Strano for Strand by someone writing headings and captions, (as opposed to the individual who wrote the report and, hopefully, did research sufficient to get the subject's name right) is not impossible. They are similar, and Strand is somewhat more common that Strano. Nor does it require an arrogant and supercilious response. Somebody made a mistake. We humans, most of the rest of us being mere mortals, do that on occasion.
Lextir, Observer is right. It was probably a typo. An example of poor proofing was kindly provided by Observer when he said, "We humans, most of the rest of us being mere mortals, do that on occasion."
If proofed, that statement would have benefited from hyphens rather than the use of commas to express his thoughts.
Well, typos aside, I enjoyed it. As a university teacher of writing and myself a writer, I can observe that the choice in the instance cited between commas and hyphens is a toin coss, really; not all rules of punctuation and grammar were written on the backside of the 10 Commandments, after all! ;-) A little individual choice is stilly permissable, even in, say, the MLW Stylesheet and the Chicago Manual of Style.
While realizing these young people are genuinely exceptional, they do provide encouragement that not *all* of us are lazy sloths (as I tend to be, so I'm looking in the mirror!).
Part of the excitement about the areas in which these folks are working is that any of those areas could yield applicable results in the wider world at lightening speed. (Of course, it may turn out that none of them work out for years or decades to come, or maybe not at all.)
But consider something I read online just yesterday: about 10 of today's better work fields didn't EXIST -- just six years ago. (No, I didn't do the research to verify that.)
Then there's the exponential growth in knowledge; call it "Moore's Law Writ Large," if you will. A desktop computer I bought in 1997 had more processing power than the entire Mission Control in Houston had when we landed the first men on the Moon -- and that's from NASA, which happened to have an article using my exact computer as a comparison, not from the manufacturer. And that's stunning.
Further, the people who are the subjects of this article will undoubtedly inspire even younger young, bright sparks who will light their own torches.
Sigh. Who am I to talk? MLA Stylesheet, not MLW!!!