The American Automatic Control Council

The American Automatic

Control Council
AACC History and Collaboration with IFAC

1957 - 2011

AACC History and Collaboration with IFAC

1957–2011

American Automatic Control Council

http://a2c2.org/
The American Automatic
Control Council
1957-2011
AACC History and Collaboration with IFAC
 Table of Contents

Foreword 1

The 1950s and the Earlier Years 4

Founding of AACC 8

Early AACC Leadership and Activities 10

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The Early Decades 13
The American Automatic Control Council (http://a2c2.org/) gratefully acknowl-
AACC’s Technical Meetings 16
edges the contributions of Stephen Kahne, Michael Masten, Francis Doyle, Abra-
ham Haddad, and Tamer Başar for writing the text of this booklet. Gene Franklin Automation Research Council 21
and Petar Kokotović helped review portions of the text. Arthur Bryson and Rudolph AACC/IFAC Foundation Building 24
Kalman contributed some historically important information as well. Extensive
Americans in IFAC Publications 28
data files were obtained from the IFAC secretariat, Laxenburg, Austria. The image
of Donald Eckman is the property of Case Western Reserve University Archives. Preparing for a Second World Congress in the US 31
Becky Lonberger helped with collection of material from different sources. Other New Century 38
images and photographs have come from many other private sources. Patricia
Appendices
Mayer designed the booklet and oversaw production.
Appendix A: American Automatic Control Council 2011 Board of Directors 43

Appendix B: American Automatic Control Council Officers 44

Appendix C: IFAC Award Winners from the United States 46

Appendix D: AACC Award Winners 50

Appendix E: United States Control Conferences 57

Appendix F: United States Residents Serving IFAC 66

American Control Conferences—Recent Venues Foreword

he second half of the twentieth century saw the emergence and rapid as-

T cent of a new discipline, automatic control, which attracted many bright

and creative minds to its ranks, with ensuing theoretical developments and
major industrial applications—a trend that continues today. Along with this new
wave came the emergence of organizations, national as well as international, that
would promote collaborations and help dissemination of new knowledge across
traditional engineering disciplines and beyond national boundaries through tech-
nical meetings (of all sizes) and technical publications accessible to all. The key
such organization in the United States (US) was the American Automatic Control
Council (AACC), founded in 1957. Fifty-four years later, today, AACC is an associ-
ation of the control systems divisions of eight member societies, with the con-
stituent institutes being AIAA (the American Institute of Aeronautics and
Astronautics), AIChE (the American Institute of Chemical Engineers), ASCE (the
2009 St. Louis
American Society of Civil Engineers), ASME (the American Society of Mechanical
Engineers), IEEE (the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers), ISA (the
International Society of Automation), SCS (the Society for Computer Simulation),
and SIAM (the Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics). Back in 1957, four
of these current member societies constituted the first board of the AACC—AIChE,
ASME, IEEE, and ISA (then called the Instrument Society of America), with IEEE
(the name did not exist at the time) actually represented by AIEE (the American
Institute of Electrical Engineers) and IRE (the Institute of Radio Engineers), making
the total number of board members five (AIEE and IRE merged and created the
IEEE in 1963).
Parallel to the founding of the AACC in the United States was an undertaking
on an international scale: the creation of the International Federation of Automatic
Control (IFAC), which was driven by the need to connect the control scientists,
engineers, and educators across different countries through technical meetings and
publications. AACC actually played a leading role in the founding of IFAC, whose
2010 Baltimore

1
 first president was from the US, Harold Chestnut. The US had two other IFAC pres- fifty-four year history of AACC with its people and events under one cover, but
idents in later years: John Lozier (1972-1975) and Stephen Kahne (1993-1996), also to provide a pathway for future leaders of IFAC and AACC to continue the tra-
during whose presidencies the two US IFAC Congresses were held (the 6th Con- dition of close collaboration and cooperation.
gress, in 1975, in Boston/Cambridge; and the 13th Congress, in 1996, in San Fran-
cisco). Tamer Başar
Since it was founded fifty-four years ago, AACC has played an important role President, AACC 2010-2011
in the evolution and nurturing of the field of automatic control in the United States, August 2011
while also being a major contributor to activities in systems and control worldwide
through its membership in IFAC as well as through its incessantly growing and ex-
panding annual conference, American Control Conference (ACC), which enjoys
significant international participation. This publication is a record of the fifty-four
years of history of AACC, focusing primarily on the relationships with IFAC and par-
allel developments. The historical account of AACC comprises the main core text
of the booklet, which is enriched by inserts providing details on some of the im-
portant developments and on biographical sketches of leaders from the US who
have been instrumental in shaping these developments within AACC as well as
IFAC. The material in the core text is further supplemented with several appendices
listing the current officers and directors of AACC, all the past officers of AACC, re-
cipients of AACC awards, recipients from the US of various IFAC awards and recog-
nitions, IFAC events held in the US, and people from the US who have taken on
pivotal positions and responsibilities within IFAC.
This booklet was put together by a sub-committee of AACC, comprised of
Steve Kahne (14th President of IFAC), as chair; Mike Masten (a former IFAC Vice-
President and Council member); Abe Haddad (a current IFAC Council member);
Frank Doyle (a member of the 2011-2014 IFAC Technical Board); and myself (a Frank Doyle (l) and Tamer Başar (r)
member of the 2011-2014 IFAC Council). Several other colleagues and friends, listed
and acknowledged elsewhere in the booklet, have provided numerous information
items, have shared with us various historical facts, and have helped with checking
of the facts. Coincident with the occurrence of the 18th IFAC Congress, in Milan,
Italy, we hope that the publication of this booklet will serve not only to have the

2 3
 The 1950s and the Earlier Years A few textbooks that contained basic control science concepts appeared prior
to 1950 and it was in part through these few books in English, or translated into
English, that an international community began to understand the potential for
control to emerge as a separate field of coherent scientific study. These included
rior to World War II, control activity in the United States was mostly in the

P design of electronic feedback amplifiers and in chemical process control

where the PID controller was the king. During the war, these technologies
were merged and vastly expanded to meet the needs of military systems of all
English language books by MacColl, Eckman, Lauer et al, James, Nichols & Phillips
mentioned above, and Brown & Campbell. In early 1951 what became the most in-
fluential of the early works was the textbook authored
by General Electric Company engineers Harold Chest-
types. These included control of aircraft, bombsights, radar, artillery pieces on land,
nut and Robert Mayer, Servomechanisms and Regulat-
long range guns on ships, and torpedoes. This set the groundwork for a compre-
ing System Design. By 1957 it had appeared in seven
hensive theory of servomechanisms based on sophisticated mathematics and im-
printings and had become a standard for engineering
plementation using vacuum tube-based electronics. A major center of this early
academic programs and was in wide use in the bur-
work was at MIT in the Radiation Laboratory. After the war, the results were re-
geoning control field in industry in the English speak-
ported in the twenty-seven volume Radiation Laboratory Series published by Mc-
ing world. This book was in what became the
Graw Hill. Volume 25 of that series, published in 1947, is entitled Theory of
traditional style of the academic textbook in control
Servomechanisms by H. M. James, a Purdue physicist, N. B. Nichols, a process
with a strong pedantic approach including numerous Harold Chestnut
control engineer from the Taylor Instruments Company, and R. S Phillips, a Uni-
homework problems in each chapter. Many of the other existing books were either
versity of Southern California mathematician.
summaries of war-time developments, or focused on specific application areas in
Very few engineers had PhDs in what we would now think of as control sci-
engineering.
ence. Much engineering work was done by classically trained physicists and a
Largely due to the popularity of his book outside the US, Harold Chestnut was
small fraction of the work was devoted to atomic weapon development. In the
one of the best known American control engineers during the 1950s. Rufus Old-
United States, much of the control engineering work took place at a few institutions
enburger of Purdue University was also a well-known US control figure at that
including General Electric, Hughes Aircraft, Bell Labs, Minneapolis Honeywell,
time and in fact had the initial germ of an idea about what later became the Inter-
MIT, Los Alamos, UCLA, Columbia, Westinghouse, and Leeds and Northrup. The
national Federation of Automatic Control (IFAC). His role in the initial Heidelberg
war effort had prevented wide spread communication of technical advances al-
meeting in 1956 was instrumental in the founding of IFAC. However, his other ob-
though there were a few examples of small groups of contributors, particularly in
ligations did not permit him to take on a leadership role in the new IFAC and he
the US and England who were in close touch about military technologies based on
suggested to his international colleagues that Chestnut would be a good candidate.
control ideas. There was almost no public communication of advances in control
The Chestnut book had made him a well-known name among this organizing
in academic institutions, few journals and conferences, and very little international
group. When the time came for IFAC to be created, Chestnut was therefore selected
sharing of scientific ideas. Little of the foreign literature was translated into English,
to be the first President of IFAC. In order to accommodate an international balance
which also contributed to the isolation of ideas in the world.
across the Iron Curtain, the Russian Aleksander Letov was selected as the Second
IFAC President and he would preside over the first IFAC World Congress to be held

4 5
 in Moscow in 1960. IFAC presidencies change only at IFAC General Assembly meet-
ings. The first of these was held in Paris in 1957 where Chestnut was elected. The
second IFAC General Assembly was held in Chicago in 1959 when Chestnut’s term
ended and Alexander Letov was elected President and went on to host the first
IFAC Congress in 1960 in Moscow. Although many of them were unknown in the
West at that time, the Russians had been making important mathematical contri-
butions to control theory for decades particularly from the 1930s at the Steklov
Mathematical Institute led by Pontryagin and the USSR Academy of Sciences In-
stitute for Control Problems in Moscow. IFAC would eventually be the vehicle for
communicating many of these world wide.

Rufus Oldenburger (l), Aleksander Letov (c), and Harold Chestnut (r) ca1960

ufus Oldenburger received his BA in classics, and MS and PhD in mathematics from the
R University of Chicago. After teaching for two years at Case Institute of Technology in
Cleveland, Ohio, he moved to Illinois Institute of Technology in Chicago, where he stayed as
Professor of Mathematics from 1934 to 1948. In 1942 he joined Woodward Governor Com-
pany in Rockford,Illinois, and stayed there until 1956 as its chief mathematician and director
of research. In 1956 he was appointed Professor of Engineering Science and Mechanical En-
gineering at Purdue University, Indiana, followed by Professor of Electrical and Mechanical
Engineering and then founder and Director of Purdue’s Automatic Control Center. He was
instrumental in the founding of IFAC and served as the first President of the AACC. He died
in 1969.

6 7
 Founding of AACC
The First AACC Directors
ne of the founding principles of IFAC was that there would be a single Na- When the American Automatic Control Council was first formed in 1957, it

O tional Member Organization (NMO) from each member country which

would be the formal member of IFAC. These NMOs had to reflect the in-
terests of control engineers across all disciplines in that country. Although several
consisted of the following members:

American Institute of Electrical Engineers

Harold Chestnut, delegate
professional societies were involved in control activities, there was no single organ- Gerhart Heumann, alternate
ization in the US devoted to control across all engineering disciplines. As a result, American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Rufus Oldenburger, delegate
during these earliest days such a US NMO was created and called the American Au-
William E.Vannah, alternate
tomatic Control Council (AACC), with Rufus Oldenburger as its first President. The Institute of Radio Engineers
initial AACC consisted of Officers and Directors with each Director representing John C. Lozier, delegate
one of the founding engineering professional societies in the US: American Society Eugene Grabbe, alternate
Instrument Society of America
of Mechanical Engineers (ASME), American Institute of Electrical Engineers (AIEE),
Robert Jeffries, delegate
Institute of Radio Engineers (IRE), Instrument Society of America (ISA), and Amer- John Johnson, Jr., alternate
ican Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE). There was some discussion of includ- American Institute of Chemical Engineers
ing a Canadian engineering society (and using the name North American Control Joel O. Hougen, delegate
Norman H. Ceaglske, alternate
Council) but that did not materialize. The first organizational meeting occurred on
Officers were elected and are listed in the Appendix.
March 16, 1957 in Chicago. This was about one month before the critical Provi-
sional Committee meeting for the formation of IFAC so when Oldenburger attended
that meeting he was representing the putative NMO from the United States. Thus
the formation of IFAC hastened the formation of the American Automatic Control
Council. Several other countries which were also likely founding members of IFAC
had no such national control organization and set about creating them. By the end
of 1957 the only members of IFAC were Austria, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Hun-
gary, Italy, Poland, the USSR, and the United States of America. Eleven additional
members joined in 1958 and by the time of the Moscow Congress there were 25
NMOs in IFAC. Today there are 50.

8 9
 Early AACC Leadership teraction easier for the Americans than some of our foreign colleagues. The fact that
so many of our foreign friends were at least somewhat fluent in English empha-
and Activities sized the importance of multi-lingual dictionaries and glossaries. There was empha-
sis on terminology and standards in the early days of AACC and IFAC. Even as late
as 1975, when the IFAC Congress was held in Cambridge, there was a discussion
o start the AACC it was necessary to create a leadership cadre, draft gov-

T ernance documents, initiate activities consistent with the purpose of the or-
ganization, create a secretariat, and facilitate interactions with IFAC. The
first major decision was that members would be American professional societies
about simultaneous translation, and a decision to finally stop that practice which
had persisted in one form or another up to that time.
The early model for an annual national control conference under the auspices
of the AACC was that the sponsoring member societies would take turns as the
in the control field. There was concern that if individuals were to be AACC mem-
meeting host and take full financial responsibility for the event. AACC was to co-
bers, that would compete with existing professional societies for membership. It
ordinate the dates and locations of the meetings. The first of these technical meet-
was quickly decided to create an annual technical conference, establish the work-
ings, which were called Joint Automatic Control Conferences, was held in 1959 in
ing relationship with the American engineering societies that constituted the AACC,
Dallas. Prior to this first “formal” conference (JACC) the technical activities of
develop a financial model for operation, and determine how to bring in major con-
AACC were devoted to preparing for and participating in the first IFAC Congress in
tributors to the control profession in the US to play leading roles in AACC activities.
Moscow in 1960. In those days there were major Congress paper reviewing re-
It was also determined that two levels of membership would be authorized. Spon-
sponsibilities for each NMO. This required extensive effort for the fledgling IFAC
sor Members were entitled to have representation on the AACC itself and to be the
and its NMOs. In the middle of the Cold War, there were national quotas to be ne-
sponsor of technical meetings taking financial responsibility and managing all as-
gotiated. Complex communication and travel plans had to be folowed in order to
pects of the meeting. There was also defined a Participating Member which was
satisfy Soviet Congress rules. In those days all Soviet control engineers involved
entitled to attend and participate in Council discussions, but had no vote and was
with IFAC had a single mailing address in Moscow; personal exchanges were pro-
not entitled to be the host of AACC technical meetings.
hibited and all contacts were tightly monitored. There are interesting accounts of
AACC would be financially supported by annual dues from all member soci-
the successes of the 1960 IFAC World Congress in Moscow and local efforts in the
eties. All expenditures exceeding $25 required written authorization by the Presi-
US to ensure that American papers were reviewed and presented there. The key
dent. Still one other feature of the first constitution of AACC was the need to create
Americans involved with putting all this together were Rufus Oldenburger (then
a program committee to mimic an IFAC equivalent. In these early days, submission
AACC President), Hal Chestnut (initial IFAC President until 1958), and Jack Lozier
of papers to the first IFAC Congress needed to be formally certified by AACC and
(second AACC President and an IFAC President from 1972 to 1975). The congress
become a “US submission” to fit within a “US quota” of papers for the Moscow
organizers determined that the only American citizens who would be allowed to
Congress. This was a short lived feature of IFAC, which today seems very strange
come to Moscow were those whose papers were accepted for the Congress. Thus
indeed. It was one of several accommodations needed to create an INTERNA-
the paper review process had this added constraint as well—an American not wel-
TIONAL Federation of Automatic Control acceptable to countries on both sides of
come in the Soviet Union at that time would not have a paper accepted! The fol-
the Iron Curtain. At least, the official IFAC language was English, which made in-
lowing is a partial list of people in the American delegation to Moscow in 1960:

10 11
 Bellman, Kalaba, Kalman, Jury, Merriam, Aseltine, Tou, Gibson, Bass, Reswick,
Axelby, Higgins, Kranc, Van Valkenburg, Bertram, Sarachik, Kirchmayer, Mesarovic,
The Early Decades
Cohn, Stout, Friedland, Kochenberger, Nichols, Zeigler, Widrow, Oldenburger,
Chestnut, Lozier, Kokotović, and Draper. It is hard to imagine the effort that was
uring the first decade of its existence, there were two major challenges for
expended by the AACC team to organize the American contribution to the IFAC
Congress in Moscow.
D the new AACC. One was support of and participation in activities of IFAC.
The other was nurturing the JACC series. As noted earlier, the JACCs were
being organized by one member society at a time, with the current host being re-
sponsible for all aspects of its JACC. Since there was no track record for these meet-
ings, each organizing committee had to start from the beginning. There was no
history, no good record of how previous JACCs were operated, no common volun-
teer staff continuing beyond their own JACC, little experience with conference ac-
counting, dealing with various university administrations for facility use, etc. An
early decision of the AACC was to encourage the organizers of the JACCs to host
the conference in a university setting in order to keep conference expenses low for
the “poorly paid faculty and student” attendees. This, in retrospect, was remarkable
since the AACC presidency, with the sole exception of its first President was occu-
pied by one industry leader after another. In fact, in its first two decades, all AACC
presidents were from non-academic organizations including Bell Labs, General
Electric, Lincoln Labs, Monsanto, Minneapolis-Honeywell, IBM, Aerospace Cor-
poration, Leeds & Northrup and the United States Air Force. After 1980 there was
a 3:1 ratio between academia and industry among the Presidents, each serving a
two year term. The JACCs occurred prior to 1980 and all but one of the Presidents
in that period were industry leaders (one switched from industry to academia dur-
ing this period) and all the conferences occurred on college campuses. After 1980
Opening ceremony, First IFAC Congress, Moscow 1960. A.N. Kosygin (First Deputy Prime all but four of the AACC Presidents were academic leaders and almost all the con-
Minister of the U.S.S.R.), unknown, Oldenburger, Broïda, Ruppel.
ferences (now called ACCs) took place in conference hotels around the country.
At the same time the US continued to play a leading role in IFAC. In 1962, a
few years after Chestnut’s term as the first IFAC President, the US and IFAC suffered
a tragic loss when Donald Eckman, a leading systems engineering professor at
Case Institute of Technology, was killed in an automobile accident in Europe while
travelling to an IFAC Council meeting in Cambridge, UK. At that time Eckman was

12 13
 chairman of what we now know as the Technical Board (then Advisory Committee)
of IFAC. John Lozier, an engineering manager at Bell Labs, was Past President of
the AACC, an IFAC Executive Council member and would continue on to be the
key US participant in the senior leadership of IFAC until his term as IFAC President
Donald Eckman
from 1972 to 1975 when the IFAC held its 6th Congress, this time at MIT. The tra-
onald P. Eckman dition of holding the IFAC Congress in the home country of its President has re-
D was educated at the
University of Michigan
mained a consistent practice from the founding of IFAC until the present time.
Since the IFAC constitution calls for only one member of the Council from any
(BS, MS) and Cornell Uni-
versity (PhD) in Mechan- given country, there have been relatively few Americans who have served on the
ical Engineering. He was IFAC Council. In particular these have been Hal Chestnut, Jack Lozier, Bill Miller,
a man of many interests: Steve Kahne, Mike Masten, and Abe Haddad. More about these gentlemen as the
science, engineering, story unfolds.
pedagogy, technical
In the early 1960s Harold Chestnut made a proposal to change the name of
writing, consulting,
music, sports cars, inven- AACC to AFACS, the American Federation of Automatic Control Societies. His rea-
tions, and process con- soning included that: a) the emerging organization was really more of a “federa-
trol. After 11 years in industry and doctoral studies he went to Case tion” than a “council,” b) the word “federation” was by then well established in
Institute of Technology in Cleveland in 1950 and assembled a research
IFAC and might more readily convey the idea that the AACC was a member of
team to study computer control of complex industrial processes. By 1958
he had authored three books, Principles of Industrial Process Control , In- IFAC, and c) the IFIP (International Federation of Information Processing) and
dustrial Instrumentation, and Automatic Process Control which were im- AFIPS (American Federation of Information Processing Societies) pairing already
portant in bringing servomechanisms and process control ideas together existed and AACC/IFAC was similar organizationally. In any event, this proposal
as the basis for improving automation systems in the manufacturing and
was not adopted and the name AACC has persisted up to this day.
processing industries. Eckman created a university-based, industrially
funded research program at Case in“concepts, techniques, and methodol-
ogy for real-time computer applications in industry”at the same time that
explosive growth was occurring in analog and digital computer technol-
ogy. He was elected Chairman of the IFAC Advisory Committee at the time
of the Moscow Congress, which today is equivalent to Vice President and
Chairman of the IFAC Technical Board. In 1962, on his way to a meeting of
the IFAC Executive Council (today’s Council) in Cambridge, he was killed in
an automobile accident on the European continent. AACC named an an-
nual award for an outstanding young contributor in the control field after
him soon after his death.

14 15
 AACC’s Technical Meetings trol field from IFAC members (countries) who have an interest in possibly hosting
the Congress. These discussions started about one decade before the proposed
Congress because the IFAC leadership hierarchy is a fundamental part of any Con-
gress proposal. It is interesting to note that the selection of the site for holding an
he JACCs experienced some difficulties as their sponsorship rotated among

T the AACC members. Not all member societies chose to serve as hosts and
it was always a topic of discussion about who was next up as host. The
meeting had to be planned several years in advance so these discussions pertained
IFAC Congress has always been a competitive process among several IFAC member
countries. The more IFAC matured the more competitive it has gotten.
In the mid-1960s John Lozier, had achieved senior status in the IFAC hierarchy
as a member of the IFAC Executive Council and the way was paved for AACC to
to meetings several years out. There was no AACC Newsletter in the early decades
host the 1975 IFAC World Congress. In 1968 a provisional committee for IFAC’75
so occasional notes in the various society journals and special mailings were the
was established within the AACC. Because AACC itself had no experience organ-
only early warnings of JACC dates. Since Chestnut’s IFAC Presidency did not in-
izing large technical meetings—recall that it was the member societies of AACC
clude an IFAC Congress, very early in AACC’s history there was discussion of when,
that hosted successive JACCs—a member society sponsor was needed for the Con-
if, and how an IFAC Congress would be held in the US. As is usual with Congress
gress. The Instrument Society of America, one of the founding members of the
planning in IFAC there are informal discussions among national leaders in the con-
AACC agreed to sponsor, on behalf of the AACC, the 6th IFAC World Congress to
be held at MIT and Harvard in Cambridge, Massachusetts. The Chairman of the
National Organizing Committee (NOC) was Nathan Cohn, Executive Vice President
John Lozier
of Leeds and Northrup, a major instrument company
ohn C. “Jack” Lozier was educated at Columbia in the US, and friend of a number of the former AACC
J University (A.B.) and Princeton University. His ca-
reer was based at Bell Telephone Laboratory in both
officers, all of whom had industrial backgrounds as
noted earlier. With his industrial contacts Nathan Cohn
engineering and engineering management. He
worked on control aspects of weapons system de- was an ideal candidate for this task. The NOC con-
sign during WW II and telecommunications. After sisted of control engineers from industry, and local
the war he supported the Shockley transistor devel- arrangements were handled by Larry Ho, Mike Athans,
opment group by designing precise temperature and George Newton from Harvard and MIT.
control systems for crystal growing and zone refin-
The JACC series of annual meetings began by re-
ing processes. He led a group that worked on real-time digital system technol-
ogy for the TELSTAR radar tracking system in the US and France and received flecting a reasonable balance between theoretical and Nathan Cohn
several patents for his work. He was the second President of the AACC, a past practice-oriented contributions in the 1960s and early
President of the predecessor to the IEEE Control Systems Society, and played a 1970s. Although it is only speculation, this balance may have partly been realized
leading role in the creation and maturation of IFAC,later to become the seventh
by the strong presence of industry based AACC leaders during the early years of
IFAC President.Lozier was a Fellow of the IEEE,received the French“Chevalier de
la Legion d’Honneur” in 1962 for his TELSTAR work, and the AACC Richard E. the meeting series. Because of the early agreements among the member societies
Bellman Control Heritage Award in 1987. He died in 1994. of AACC, the JACCs tended to be the most important control engineering meetings
in the US each year. Member societies had agreed not to hold independent control

16 17
 meetings that could compete with the JACCs. Attendance and interest from foreign
authors was modest and growing but the original idea of having the JACC being
John Zaborszky
the only control meeting of the member societies was rather quickly becoming un-
tenable. In many of the member societies, sessions on control engineering were ohn Zaborszky received both the Diploma of En-
often present in larger scope conferences. Over time the planned exclusivity of the J gineering in 1937 and the D.Sc. degree, with spe-
cial honors, in 1943 from the Royal Hungarian
JACC caused all sorts of havoc for the member societies. Problems of date conflicts
Technological University, Budapest.
with other meetings, including IFAC conferences in the US were common. Although After coming to the U.S. in 1947 he spent most
there was a planning function for JACCs envisioned in the Bylaws of AACC, and of his professional career at Washington University
guidelines were developed, rotating responsibility every year among the sponsoring in St. Louis where he founded and chaired the De-
partment of Systems Science and Mathematics.After
members of AACC led to problems that were not to be rectified until the early
retiring,he continued to contribute to the School as
1980s. The JACCs suffered from lack of continuity among organizing teams and a senior professor. He was an active industry consultant and authored two books
a growing unhappiness with university style “hotel” rooms in often remote loca- and over 200 technical papers.
tions. There was a growing sense that the “national American control meeting of Dr.Zaborszky was instrumental in the formation of the Control Systems Society
the year” should be a bit more elegant, more centrally organized in a consistent as one of the first three IEEE Societies and was President of it in 1970. He was Presi-
dent of the AACC from 1980 to 1981,and played a leading role in the JACC/ACC tran-
style, and less of a burden to single societies each year. It should be more poised
sition. He was a Fellow of IEEE, a member of the U.S. National Academy of
for growth, and more recognizable as a continuing annual event with a consistent Engineering, an Honorary (foreign) Member of the Hungarian Academy of Science,
image, more stable attendance, ever higher quality papers, and presentation in pro- and won numerous other awards for his technical accomplishments.John Zaborszky
fessional surroundings. In the midst of all of this the AACC prepared to host the died in 2008.

6th IFAC World Congress in 1975 in Cambridge. There was no JACC held that year.
Thus during the mid-1970s the focus of AACC was on the organization of the
IFAC Congress and the following JACCs in succeeding years which were still removed from new operating principles. One of the key principles of the new an-
plagued by the difficulties mentioned above. JACC attendance was not strong, and nual meeting, the American Control Conference (ACC), was that there was to be
even with a substantial JACC Operating Manual in existence, the whole process of an AACC standing committee for the ACCs with rolling membership including in-
having an annual meeting was neither smooth nor financially stable. Occasionally dividuals who were involved in organizing contiguous ACCs. Another fundamen-
one of the annual sponsors would simply not follow the agreed upon rules about tal principle was that the AACC itself would have financial responsibility for all
meeting dates or other details that deviated from that society’s standard operating ACCs and that the surplus from each ACC was to be used for AACC expenses plus
procedures for their other meetings. John Zaborszky, a Professor at Washington a distribution by formula back to member societies. The formula included weight-
University in St. Louis was moving toward the AACC Presidency and committed ings that benefitted member societies according to the number of ACC papers ac-
himself to resolve this long standing problem with the JACC around the time of his cepted and number of attendees from each society. So it was that in 1982 the first
two-year AACC Presidential term in 1980-1981. For several years prior to the emer- ACC was held in Arlington, Virginia, a suburb of Washington, DC. The IEEE ac-
gence of the American Control Conference, JACC attendee surveys were taken and cepted permanent responsibility for the distribution of post conference ACC pro-
analyzed, old ideas about rotational hosting, inconsistent image and conflicts were

18 19
 ceedings, an arrangement that has evolved over time but in various forms has con-
tinued to this day and has been an important source of income to the AACC and
Automation Research Council
its member societies.
In the 1970s the process control industries, a major sector for automation,
ontrol theory was growing in importance and suggesting new practical im-
were not benefitting from rapid advances in control and computer technology.
This led the ACC to plan and execute a national industry wide study of automation
with the potential for near-term implementation. A subcommittee of AACC was es-
tablished called the Automation Research Council which was designed to manage
C plementations in the 1960s. New computing devices were being created
that enabled some applications of this theory. These early applications of
automatic control were severely hindered by the practice of studying individual
control devices, without consideration for the interactions that might occur across
research funding to determine research needed to make qualitative improvements
the hundreds of devices in a typical industrial system. This “reductionist” decom-
in automation in US industry.
position was engrained in the corporate culture as separate teams of engineers
would work in isolation on individual units, despite the strong interactions that
were known to exist in an overall process.
The rapid advances with process automa-
tion in the industries of US and Japan raised con-
cerns about the effects of such automation on
the workforce, employment, working conditions,
as well as industrial profitability and product
quality. The AACC, then headed by the leader-
ship team of Duane McRuer, Nathanial Nichols,
William Vannah, and Joseph Shapiro, all control
specialists from various US corporations, were
encouraged by Ted Williams to take a broader
look at the emerging field of automation and its
potential impact on US industry and US society.
Ted Williams
Williams had been at Monsanto but by then was
a Professor at Purdue University. To address the challenges of interacting complex
unit operations in industrial processes, Ted Williams and his colleagues developed
mathematical models of these complex units. The models enabled the detailed
AACC reception for IFAC officials, Budapest 1984 study of control strategies that could systematically address the interactions, thus
employing a “systems engineering” approach.

20 21
 This was the era in which national industrial policy was discussed in the There were additional attempts to obtain fed-
United States, a subject that went out of favor later in the 20th century in this coun- eral support for research planning studies but the
try. The AACC initiated a study of the broad implications of automation in the US AACC was not a particularly good vehicle for ob-
including societal and economic impacts. With incremental funding in the mid- taining such support. Even in those days the federal
1970s from the US National Science Foundation, AACC created the Automation government was not enthusiastic to fund industrial
Research Council (ARC) which was established as a new standing committee of groups or even industrial/academic consortia since
AACC. It proposed to organize a series of workshops and summarize conclusions the National Science Foundation was a research
in reports dealing with automation issues in various US industrial sectors. The sec- funding agency rather than a research planning
tors were chosen in which automation was of fundamental importance to product funding agency. Many of the individuals in AACC
quality and cost effective manufacturing. Even at that time, it was clear that the who were working in universities had individual
focus would be on improvements in system design and system engineering. Work- research grants from the NSF, but these were not
shops and focus groups were conducted in such areas as manufacturing architec- related to AACC activities.
ture, CAD/CAM, man-machine interface systems, health services, and discrete After the transition from the JACC to the ACC in the early 1980s, AACC lead-
manufacturing. Most participants in these workshops were from industry, but the ership was drawn more from academia than industry. In the United States there
intention was to identify research that could be performed in academia as well. tended to be less support for professional society activities from American industry;
The Automation Research Council existed for approximately 4 years, and was academia moved into the void thus created. Unfortunately this characteristic has
closely associated with the Instrument Society of America (ISA). It did, in fact, persisted into the 21st century. It can be argued that this shift reflected more em-
conduct the workshops and developed what we would call today white papers on phasis by US companies on short term planning and growing emphasis on short
significant research needs of interest to the US industry. Industrial participation term goals driven in part by financial market pressures and globalization. However,
was strong with representatives from tens of major US corporations. A number of the research community in the control field responded well to the new style of the
research universities in the country also participated. The companies included ACCs and the conference, although somewhat more research oriented than may be
Chrysler, Foxboro, Ford, IBM, United Rubber Works, Taylor Instruments, Bethlehem wished by the development and manufacturing communities, has thrived for sev-
Steel, Systems Technology, Cincinnati Milicron, Western Electric, General Motors, eral decades up to now.
Perkin-Elmer, Whirlpool, Honeywell, McDonnel Douglas, among others. In addi-
tion, the US Departments of Labor and State, several labor unions, and key univer-
sities were also involved in the workshops and resulting reports. Professor Williams
worked under a contract between the AACC and Purdue University as the multi-
year Director of the ARC.
The ARC was to be the only contract work undertaken by the AACC in all of
its 50 year history and in fact marked the beginning of transition from industrial
leadership of AACC to academic leadership.

22 23
 AACC/IFAC Foundation Building venture between IFAC and Pergamon Press (and after mergers, Elsevier Science,
Ltd.). He was in line to be President of the IEEE Control Systems Society in 1981
and thus a Director of the AACC at that time.
Americans had always been part of the IFAC family since the beginning, and
s noted, Jack Lozier’s leadership within IFAC occurred from the late 1960s

A through his Presidency from 1972 to 1975. In mid 1960s IFAC had a few
technical committees, including Theory, Applications, Education, and Ter-
minology. In addition, each of these committees had many subcommittees on var-
as the Federation matured they realized that certain symbolic traditions were valu-
able for a stable and growing organization. It was Nat Cohn, IFAC’75 NOC Chair-
man, who developed the idea of creating an original banner to symbolize each
IFAC Congress. The collection of these would be prominently displayed at each
ious contemporary topics. It became obvious to Lozier that IFAC’s growth
Congress venue. Of course at the time of IFAC75 there was not a collection for pre-
depended on the success of such committees and their expansion and leadership.
vious Congresses. Cohn and his colleagues from AACC designed and produced one
It is hard from today’s perspective to realize in those days how important termi-
banner for each of the previous five Congresses as well as one for IFAC75 (See
nology and standards were to this fledgling professional field of control and sys-
tems. Rather than continue to try to force all control technical interests into so few
committees with numerous subgroupings (task forces, subcommittees, working
groups), it was useful to convert many of the subgroups into technical committees Stephen Kahne
in their own right. By the end of his presidency there were between 15 and 20 IFAC
tephen Kahne was educated at Cor-
Technical Committees. The presence of so many TCs in IFAC influenced the AACC
as well, and the number of AACC technical committees also expanded. In part, this
S nell University (BEE) and the Univer-
sity of Illinois (MS, PhD). Much of his
expansion introduced many more middle level international technical leadership professional career was as a professor
and administrator at the University of
openings for Americans and, of course, for all the other IFAC member states.
Minnesota, Case Western Reserve Uni-
Following Lozier’s service on the IFAC Council and as IFAC President, William versity, Polytechnic Institute of New
Miller, an American technical marketing executive for General Electric’s steel mill York, Oregon Graduate Center, and
automation department took on the senior leadership role from the United States Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University.
He was also a Director of InterDesign,an environmental design firm in Minneapolis,
within IFAC. He had extensive industrial contacts in many IFAC countries and by
Division Director at the National Science Foundation, and Group Chief Scientist at
virtue of all this experience was well informed and well recognized within the IFAC the MITRE Corporation,all in the United States.He was President of the IEEE Control
countries. He had served as chairman of several IFAC committees including as Systems Society,Vice President for Technical Activities of the IEEE,and President of
Chairman of the powerful IFAC Advisory Committee (later to become the IFAC IFAC and is a Fellow of the IEEE, AAAS, and IFAC. He has been a leader in technical
Technical Board) and eventually as an IFAC Vice President. By the early 1980s the publications in the control field including serving as Editor-in-Chief of the IEEE
Transactions on Automatic Control, member and Chair of the IFAC Publications
other American who was taking a leading role in the US-IFAC relationship was
Managing Board, member of numerous journal Editorial Boards, and a founder of
Professor Stephen Kahne. Kahne already had more than a decade of IFAC experi- IFAC Papers-On-Line.An extensive biography of Dr.Kahne appears in the June 2010
ence in committee leadership roles and in publications including creation and lead- issue of the IEEE Control Systems Magazine.
ership of the IFAC Publications Managing Board (PUMB), a joint publications

24 25
 front cover). That tradition has continued to this day. The tradition, started by the load of responsibilities. Numerous IFAC related correspondence was being over-
AACC in 1975, is for each upcoming Congress NOC to create its own banner (all looked and the AACC/IFAC relationship was becoming somewhat strained. The
the same overall size with an image appropriate for the Congress venue) and unveil volunteer AACC Secretary in the early 1980s was Marion (Bud) Keyes from the
it at the Closing Ceremony of the previous Congress. The complete collection of Bailey Controls Company. Keyes was promoted to President and General Manager
banners, growing by one each triennium, appears at each Congress site as part of of Bailey and did not have time to continue as AACC Secretary. Bill Miller was ap-
ceremonial displays. At the IFAC Congress in Seoul, South Korea in 2008, the Ko- proaching retirement at General Electric, had extensive knowledge of IFAC and of
rean NMO distributed a booklet “Book of Banners” that shows the entire collection AACC, and was prepared to take on the AACC Secretariat function. His appoint-
of 17 banners up to that time. ment as AACC Secretary, which would turn out to be nine years long, set the stage
Just before IFAC’75, another for AACC to see success for its Newsletter, its new annual conference, its finances,
AACC contribution was intro- and the gradual modernization into computerized secretarial operations. While
duced into IFAC traditions when AACC needed to continually update its data processing technology, there was also
Irena Kahne, artist wife of a need to try to remain compatible with the IFAC Secretariat as it also was mod-
Stephen Kahne, created and do- ernizing its office operations. There were frequent debates about Mac vs. PC office
nated to IFAC an artistic tapestry computer setups between IFAC’s Laxenburg staff and the new AACC office run by
displaying the IFAC logo. This be- Bill Miller. Teletype machines were being replaced by facsimile technology. Elec-
came the official IFAC Presidential tronic records were being created in various incompatible formats and these were
tapestry. It is presented by the changing at different speeds around the world. Miller had developed some expert-
outgoing to the incoming IFAC ise in this new office automation and became a principal advisor to the IFAC Sec-
President as part of the transfer of retariat on these matters. He was an advocate of the Mac style of office automation.
office ceremony at the closing ses- There were some differences between the American approach and the European
sion of each Congress. It remains approach, but it was all very friendly.
in the office or home of the cur- IFAC Presidential Tapestry

rent President for three years until passed on to the next President during the next
Congress. Other symbolic objects have been created by other NMOs and are now
part of IFAC’s continuing traditions.
Once the 1975 Congress was behind them, AACC took on two pressing prob-
lems. One of these was the transition from JACC to ACC and the second was a
new and stable structure for the AACC Secretariat. Following one-man operations
for the first 20 or so years of AACC existence, the AACC Secretariat had briefly
been housed at the Instrument Society of America (ISA) headquarters. The insti-
tutionalized secretariat operation at the ISA could not keep up with the growing

26 27
 Americans in IFAC Publications fter several years as a technician design-
A ing timing circuits and mechanisms,
George Axelby earned his BS at the University
rom the beginning of the AACC it was realized that communication of tech- of Connecticut in 1950,and MS at Yale Univer-

F nical developments should lie at the heart of any professional society in the
control field. Although there was occasional discussion of some sort of
AACC technical publication, it became clear that member societies’ journals, some
sity in 1951.He then joined the Westinghouse
Aerospace Division in the Baltimore area and
spent his entire professional career there. He
was part of the founding group of the new IRE
of which had been in existence for decades before 1960, would form the basis of Professional Group on Automatic Control in
the 1950s, and before long was the key leader
the American scientific journal output in the control field. Thus the IRE Transac-
in publications for that Group. He was the
tions on Automatic Control, the AIEE Transactions, the ASME Journal of Dynamics founding Editor (now called Editor-in-Chief) of what became the IEEE Transactions
and Control, the American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE) Journal, on Automatic Control and served in that leadership position from 1954 to 1968 until
Chemical Engineering Progress (CEP), and the Instrument Society of America (ISA) he was selected as Editor (now called Editor-in-Chief) of the new IFAC Journal AUTO-
Transactions continued or merged to create a strong American control journal pres- MATICA and continued in that position until 1993.Axelby was an IEEE Fellow,an IFAC
Fellow, and the namesake of the George S. Axelby Outstanding Paper Award of the
ence in the late 1960s. AACC would stay with its JACC (and later ACC) Proceedings
IEEE Control Systems Society. He died in 2008.
as its sole publishing work.
In the UK, Pergamon Press had started a control journal in 1963—AUTOMAT-
ICA. This was a commercial control journal originally initiated by Robert Maxwell, cial responsibility and reaped any surplus from the Congress or other technical
owner and publisher of Pergamon Press. AUTOMATICA was only modestly suc- meetings. Maxwell, Coales, and Chestnut formed a plan to have AUTOMATICA be-
cessful in the 1960s with an honorary editorial board, many of whose members come the official IFAC journal, with Pergamon providing the journal vehicle and a
were part of the IFAC founding community. Maxwell was a flamboyant figure in decade of financial underwriting and IFAC providing the technical content. The
the global publishing scene; a Member of the British Parliament, owner of a British only thing remaining was to determine who should be the Editor (now called Ed-
football team, and publisher of a major London newspaper. He was eager to en- itor-in-Chief). At that time George Axelby was recognized throughout the world as
hance the international prestige of his company Pergamon Press. Creation of inter- the premier editor of control engineering technical publications, having created
national scientific journals was one of his ideas for achieving this. One of the and led for 14 years, the IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control. The deal breaker
AUTOMATICA Editorial Board members was Professor John Coales, the third Pres- for Maxwell was that his contribution to the project—AUTOMATICA and financial
ident of IFAC. Hal Chestnut was Chairman of the AUTOMATICA Board. support—was contingent on naming Axelby as Editor. George was at first reluctant
At the same time, IFAC, still in its first decade of existence, was giving serious to step down as the Transactions Editor—“his” journal from birth to maturity. After
consideration to creating its own scientific journal. So, Maxwell had his rather several back and forth negotiations, he finally accepted the assignment, left the
weak journal and IFAC was thinking about starting an IFAC Journal. IFAC’s finan- Transactions, and was AUTOMATICA Editor-in-Chief from 1969 until his retirement
cial situation in those days was rather precarious since its main money making in 1993. After a Dutch Editor Huibert Kwakernaak’s term, AUTOMATICA again
ventures were actually sponsored by its national members, which assumed finan- has an American Editor-in-Chief, Professor Tamer Başar. There have been numer-

28 29
 anos Gertler graduated from the Technical Uni-
Preparing for a Second
J versity of Budapest, in Electrical Engineering,
and then received the Candidate of Science (Ph.D.)
World Congress in the US
and Doctor of Science degrees in Control Engi-
neering from The Hungarian Academy of Sciences.
For 10 years, he was Vice Director of a large re- he IFAC Council has always included an American member. Three years
search institute in Budapest. He came to the US in
1981 and held visiting positions at Case Western
Reserve University and the New York Polytechnic
University. Since 1985 he has been Professor of
T after Lozier completed his Presidency, Bill Miller was elected to the Council
from the US. Miller served one term as ordinary member of the Council and
then two terms as IFAC Vice President. Following this Kahne was elected to the
Electrical and Computer Engineering at George Council as a Vice President. Miller moved into the AACC Secretary position and
Mason University in Virginia.Dr.Gertler’s research interests have concerned various
during his term (1982-1991) there were 35 IFAC technical events in the US. To sup-
aspects of computer control and monitoring of engineering processes, including
high-level programming, systems identification, fault detection and diagnosis. port the coming ACC in 1982 and beyond, a new AACC Newsletter was being de-
Janos Gertler has served IFAC in many capacities. He was the first chair of the signed and implemented. In addition, the first discussions were taking place within
Technical Committee on Computers, chair of the Policy Committee and the Publi- AACC to invite IFAC to hold its World Congress in the US in the mid-1990s. This
cations Committee,and member of the Constitution Committee.He was a member
would require that an American, to be IFAC President in the future, would need to
of the Publications Managing Board from 1976 to 2011 and served as its chair for
be identified a decade ahead.
six years. He was also the Editor-in-Chief of the Conference Proceedings Series for
ten years and has been the Editor of the IFAC Journal Annual Reviews in Control At first the AACC delegated to specific US institutions the authority to host
since 1996. He served as Program Chair of the 1984 IFAC Congress (in Budapest) IFAC technical meetings in the US. This led to a somewhat disorganized collection
and as Editor of the 1996 IFAC Congress in San Francisco. Dr. Gertler is a Fellow of of IFAC conferences each with its own conference proceedings, each prepared by
IEEE, Fellow and Advisor of IFAC, and a Foreign Member of the Hungarian National
a different printing company and later available for purchase from different local
Academy of Sciences.
distributors. The hosts were different local units, typically universities. AACC for-
mally authorized each meeting and ensured that basic IFAC rules were followed.
ous Americans taking leading editorial positions in AUTOMATICA over the As IFAC publications policies evolved and as the JACC/ACC transition progressed,
decades. They are listed elsewhere. AACC’s role changed. Since the middle 1980s AACC gives formal national approval
The IFAC—Elsevier (current name of what was Pergamon Press) relationship of a meeting recommended by an IFAC technical committee to ensure that IFAC
has developed over the decades and has been overseen by a so-called Publications policies are followed by the US organizers. This approval includes a financial un-
Managing Board. Americans Janos Gertler and Stephen Kahne have served on this derwriting commitment for the event in case of financial difficulties. In any case,
Board since its creation in 1976. Professor Kahne, the third American to be IFAC ultimately it has always been IFAC’s decision whether or not to agree to the date,
President, is profiled elsewhere. place, and proposed content of the event.
There is value in having active specialists from an NMO as members of the var-
ious technical committees of IFAC and participating in decisions made by those
committees about topics, venues, and dates of such IFAC events. All IFAC technical

30 31
 meetings are the responsibility of the appropriate IFAC Technical Committee and Eastern European technical tour was led by Bill Miller to several countries in the
IFAC’s rules require that the International Program Committee (IPC) for each IFAC mid-1980s. Another such study visit was a Chinese trip in the late 1980s. In each
technical event be truly international. There was an early tendency to only use na- case AACC facilitated the arrangements through its contacts with other IFAC NMOs
tional technical experts on the IPC for IFAC events held in a particular country. in the visited countries. Such institutional help was important in those days be-
The requirement for a truly international team of experts to frame the technical pro- cause there remained numerous government impediments to free travel and inter-
gram of these events was firmed up during IFAC’s evolution. This ensured that change of technical ideas.
some Americans were almost always on IPCs for all IFAC meetings and represented With the 1986 IFAC commitment to hold its World Congress in the US in 1996
still another way that new international opportunities for leadership were available and the several previous years of preparation leading to that decision, many AACC
to the AACC community. At the same time, the annual ACC Program Committees activities began to focus on IFAC and the AACC-IFAC relationship. Kahne had al-
grew into truly international groups of technical experts to shape the annual ACC ways believed that the American control community should be better informed
programs. Workshops and Tutorials at the ACCs were a popular feature of the meet- about IFAC and the American role in it. In 1987 he initiated “Global Concerns” a
ings and an international group of lecturers became a standard feature of the meet- regular column in the AACC Newsletter which conveyed to the American audience
ings, often serving as plenary lecturers or workshop organizers. Thus by mid 1980s insights into IFAC and other international issues of interest to the AACC. This reg-
the American Control Conference was really an international meeting. ular column in the Newsletter has been authored by the contemporary US member
In 1991 Lennart Ljung (Sweden) was an IFAC Vice President and Chairman of of the IFAC Council up to the present time. In addition there were more opportu-
the IFAC Technical Board. He and the IFAC Council were eager to keep US and nities for Americans to serve in technical leadership positions in IFAC.
IFAC interests aligned and to ensure that the major US control conference (the As part of a strategic plan for IFAC, the structure of the IFAC Technical Board
ACC) was operated and scheduled in a manner that would facilitate strong inter- changed in 1993 to create more technical committees within IFAC. The IFAC TCs
national participation. The suggestion from both sides was that some sort of rela-
tionship be established to accomplish that. Thus it was that since 1991 the ACCs
have been “affiliated with” IFAC and the idea of IFAC regional conferences grew to AACC Newsletter Editors
include European, and Asian IFAC regional conferences. Once again the Ameri-
Since 1981 the AACC has published a semi-annual Newsletter, first in print, then in
can-IFAC relationship proved to be a creative force within the international com- electronic form only. The Newsletter Editors have been:
munity.
After the Boston/Cambridge IFAC Congress, AACC arranged occasional special 1981-1989 Hiro Mukai,Washington University
technical visits by American scholars and industry control engineers. This is one 1990-1995 Bonnie Heck Ferri, Georgia Institute of Technology
way for the IFAC community to bring control and automation ideas to countries 1995-2001 Lucy Pao, University of Colorado
that can benefit from this technology. In the 1970s a South American lecture tour 2002-2003 Randy Freeman, Northwestern University
was arranged by Purdue University’s Ted Williams. Americans, under the auspices 2004-2006 Pradeep Misra,Wright State University
of the AACC and its members went abroad in small groups on teaching and tech- 2006- May-Win Thein, University of New Hampshire
nical tours. In 1981, the IEEE Control Systems Society led a multi-city technical
tour of China with many participants from the AACC technical community. An

32 33
 had previously developed a complicated structure of various task forces and sub of volunteers. The strength of each program and level of attendance grew almost
committees to accomplish the technical work in their fields of interest. It was found monotonically with each event. For 1996, the ACC was replaced by the IFAC Con-
that volunteers leading these efforts had more success in getting the support gress in San Francisco. In order to gain experience with the San Francisco confer-
needed for their volunteer tasks if they were heading a technical committee rather ence management community, the 1993 ACC was also held in San Francisco, a
than sub-units of TCs. Under Ljung’s leadership, a new IFAC Technical Board struc- dry run for the 1996 Congress.
ture was initiated. During the next two triennia, Vladimir Kucera (IFAC Technical During this period from the mid 1980s to the mid 1990s, AACC became more
Board Chair following Ljung and later IFAC pres- active with new awards being created, not only for the AACC but also for IFAC.
ident) and his vice chairs (Mike Rabins and Mike Harold Chestnut’s family approached Steve Kahne in 1986 with an offer to fund an
Masten, from the US), refined the new Technical IFAC prize for the best textbook in control. As noted earlier in this narrative, it was
Board into the operational structure used today. Harold Chestnut’s earliest textbook that was instrumental in his selection as the
The number of IFAC TCs jumped from about 15 first IFAC President in the late 1950s. The family thought it would be appropriate
to about 40. They are organized into Coordinating if they contributed to the recognition of authors of out-
Committees (CCs) and the Chairs of these CCs standing control textbooks. It was agreed by IFAC to use
became members of the IFAC Technical Board. these funds for a textbook prize and at Kahne’s recom-
These senior technical leadership positions pro- mendation, they agreed that the Chestnut name would
vided opportunities for Americans and other not be used for this prize while Harold Chestnut was
NMO members to serve in higher level IFAC positions. Names of Americans who still living. The first of these triennial awards was made
have served in all these IFAC leadership roles are in an appendix to this document. in 1987 and after Harold died in 2001, this IFAC prize
Key IFAC96 Congress leaders were appointed by the AACC. Dr. Harold Soren- was renamed the Harold Chestnut Control Engineering
son, Senior Vice President and General Manager of Nathaniel Nichols Textbook Prize. Based on his experience as the chair of
the MITRE Corporation was appointed NOC Chair- the IFAC Quazza Medal Committee, Petar Kokotović suggested a new IFAC award
man for the Congress. Professor Jose Cruz at UC- to recognize important achievements in control engineering practice to honor
Irvine, then Ohio State University Engineering Dean, Nathaniel Nichols. With strong support of Steve Kahne, AACC agreed and worked
was appointed IPC Chairman, and Professor David with IFAC to produce IFAC’s Nathaniel B. Nichols
Auslander at UC-Berkeley was the Conference Man- Medal which was awarded for the first time at the
ager. As part of the early planning, the IEEE under- 1996 IFAC Congress in San Francisco to Professor Ju-
wrote financial responsibility for the Congress, a rgen Ackermann (Germany). Nick Nichols was in
guarantee that was never used because of the even- the audience for the presentation. AACC underwrote
tual success of the Congress. the startup costs of the award and IFAC has sup-
At the same time, annual ACCs were handled ported it in the long term. Four out of the next five
with professional skill each year by a growing cadre Nichols Medal

34 35
 triennial IFAC Nichols Medals went to four outstanding American control experts
from US industry.
By the late 1990s the ACC regularly used electronic media for producing its Pro- re-conference workshops offer opportunities for conference participants
ceedings. The technology used for proceedings changed from CDs, then DVDs and P to receive in-depth information and training about well established tech-
niques, emerging developments,and new topics within the control field. Mod-
some conferences now use flash drives. Various attempts to encourage industrial
est enrollment fees are charged for these additional conference opportunities.
participation in the ACCs have been tried, with modest success. Pre-conference
Pre-conference workshops have been offered for many years at the Amer-
workshops as part of the ACC program have been in place since the early 1980s.
ican Control Conferences (ACCs). However the selection of workshop topics
Special review processes for industrial papers have been tried. In addition, exper- and the overall operation of the workshops were only informal in the early
iments have been tried using industrial practice invited sessions, daily registration years.The number of workshops offered at each ACC varied from year to year,
fees to attract local industrial specialists, special topic panel discussions, jointly and they were generally limited in duration and scope.The 1986 ACC in Seattle
was the first ACC in which a specific volunteer was assigned the task of identi-
sponsored technical sessions with industrial groups, have come and gone over
fying workshop topics,selecting qualified workshop presenters,and managing
time. the overall operation of the workshops.This was Mike Masten’s first service to
ACC,and he subsequently served each of the ACCs—except one— for the next
17 years (1986 - 2002). Around 1988-89,the AACC formally established an ACC
Workshops Committee to provide increased focus,and Dr.Masten also chaired
this committee until 2002. As greater attention was given to pre-conference
Michael K. Masten
workshops,several innovations were made. Detailed attendance records were
kept for each workshop topic, feedback questionnaires were collected follow-
ichael K.“Mike”Masten was born in Texas in 1939. He
M earned BSEE, MSEE, and PhD from The University of
Texas in Austin and spent his professional career at Texas
ing each workshop, surveys were conducted to identify new topics of interest,
and periodic market surveys were conducted to evaluate the cost and quality
of ACC workshops compared to similar offerings from other associations. As
Instruments. He managed technical support organizations
a result, subsequent ACCs offered a combination of proven topics of interest
which designed and developed a variety of control imple-
plus new emerging topics which were in early development. The number of
mentations for military and consumer products. Mike Mas-
workshops offered at each ACC was significantly increased,enrollment fees be-
ten was granted ten patents and was elected TI Fellow in 1989.
came indexed to ACC registration fees, and surplus-sharing financial arrange-
Dr. Masten has been active in IFAC including as member of the IFAC Council
ments were developed for the presenters. Workshop quality improved, while
(1999-2005) and IFAC Vice President -Technical Board (2002-2005). He received the
enrollment costs remained low for attendees, and workshop presenters re-
IFAC Outstanding Service Award in 2002, was appointed as IFAC Advisor in 2005, and
ceived suitable stipends.
was elected IFAC Fellow in 2006.
Regarding his service to other professional societies,Dr.Masten was IEEE Control
Systems Society President (1996) and a member of the IEEE Board of Directors (1997-
98). He was elected IEEE Fellow in 1990, and he received the IEEE Millennium Medal
in 2000.

36 37
 New Century

n the US, questions about security and intelligence for safety of industrial

I processes led to the creation of a Process Control Security Forum (PCSF) at

the start of the 21st century. The lead agency in the US government was the
newly created Department of Homeland Security. Its purpose was to share infor-
mation about security of process industries that were susceptible to terror threats.
Control systems are at the heart of many of these industrial sectors including elec-
tric power, petrochemical companies, pharmaceutical manufacturing, and public
works. There are many barriers to free exchange of information in this environment
and it is uncomfortable for AACC to play an active role. However, the technologies
represented by the AACC member organizations play key roles in all these indus- High School Workshop, Atlanta 2010
tries and a common base of science and engineering practice recommended that
posure is a key to achieving that goal. This pioneering effort brings control systems
AACC participate in this PCSF. The national security implications of this topic fi-
to middle- and high-school students and their teachers. The goal of these outreach
nally led to its demise outside of the US intelligence community and so AACC’s role
efforts is to promote an increased awareness among students and teachers of the
was minimal. However it did remind us of the relevance of the control sciences to
importance and cross-disciplinary nature of control and systems technology.
a wide range of safety and security matters facing the United States.
Much before NSF was concerned with K-12 education, our control community
For the past ten years the AACC in cooperation with other societies has created
had the idea that high-school teachers and their students should be made aware
an Ideas and Technology Control Systems workshop for middle- and high-school
of and become involved in basic ideas of control theory. The idea was that educa-
teachers and students. These workshops are held twice a year, one of which coin-
tion is at all levels an inclusive process. It should integrate scholarship, teaching,
cides with the time and venue of the ACC. During the last decade the workshops
and learning both horizontally and vertically. Professor Bozenna Pasik-Duncan
were presented to over 3,000 students and teachers in Baltimore, Chicago, Denver,
from the University of Kansas has spear-headed the effort since its inception. AACC
Hawaii, Las Vegas, New Orleans, Portland, San Diego, Seattle, St. Louis, and Atlanta.
and its partners have developed a model that has been followed by other organi-
The activity strives to bring control system concepts and technologies to the
zations and societies. It has established a sustainable outreach partnership among
attention of high-school and middle-school students and teachers. It is explained
the control communities and school districts at the places where major conferences
that control is used in many common devices and systems, such as computer hard
are held.
drives, VCRs, automobiles, and aircraft, but it is usually hidden from view. It is un-
The workshop activities include presentations by control systems experts from
derstood that the longevity of the control field which spans science, technology, en-
our technical community, informal discussions, and the opportunity for teachers
gineering and mathematics (STEM), depends on its continuous success in
to meet passionate researchers and educators from academia, industry, and gov-
attracting the most gifted young people to the profession. Furthermore, early ex-

38 39
 ernment. The talks are designed to be educational, inspirational and entertaining,
showing the excitement of being an engineer.
This AACC history in an IFAC context
In addition, discussions and presentations of “Plain Talks” were initiated. This
important educational activity was closely related to the outreach efforts described fter Steve Kahne completed his 12 year service on the IFAC Council in 1999,
above. The goal has been to develop short excellent presentations, not only for A IFAC was beginning to think about its coming 50th anniversary. There is some-
thing about 50 years of existence that seems to stimulate thoughts of organiza-
teachers and students, but also for other non-control engineering communities.
tional history. Kahne was asked by the Council to assemble a team to develop a
AACC is proud of its history of facilitating a strong control presence in the US 50th anniversary program to reflect on IFAC’s 50 years of service to the international
and continuing contributions to the international scene through IFAC. The current control community. The only specification for what became known as IFAC50 was
team of American leaders remains committed to providing a structure for construc- to include a celebratory event marking 50 years of IFAC. The event itself was chaired
by Rolf Isermann from the German NMO and was held in Heidelberg in 2006.
tive exchange of ideas across all engineering disciplines and to ensure close collab-
IFAC50 consisted of 7 projects:
oration with the world-wide control community.
1. The event in Heidelberg in 2006.
2. An archive of recent (since 2005) IFAC Proceedings which has evolved into
IFAC-Papers On Line, with Professor Juan de la Puente (Spain) as its first
Editor-in-Chief. There is a permanent hard copy archive of all past IFAC
Proceedings (1960-2004) now housed in a science museum in Milan
(www.istitutolombardo.it) with a duplicate collection at the IFAC Secretariat.
3. On-line control materials for students which is evolving as“Control Resources”
on the IFAC website now under the guidance of Bozenna Pasik-Duncan from
the US, and the IFAC Education Committee.
4. A reference listing of control textbooks which evolved into a special book on
classic control textbooks designed and edited by Janos Gertler from the US.
AACC and other NMOs now use the book as gifts for award winners.
5. A history of IFAC which evolved into several articles,Kahne’s presentation at the
2006 Heidelberg celebration,and a decision to create an IFAC History Commit-
tee to become active in September 2011.
6. A means to help students from developing countries to attend IFAC events,
which is now a major task of the IFAC Foundation.
7. And finally, encouragement for all IFAC NMOs to document their own history,
which has evolved into a growing collection of NMO histories including those
from Italy, Slovenia, South Africa, Austria, France, and now the United States.

The AACC team that wrote this document hopes that it will stimulate other
IFAC NMOs to share their history with the rest of the control community.

40 41
 APPENDIX A

American Automatic Control Council 2011

Board of Directors
The government of the American Automatic Control Council (AACC)—the IFAC
National Member Organization (NMO) for the United States—resides entirely in the
AACC Board of Directors. The Board is composed of the AACC Executive Officers and the
Society Directors from each Member Society of the AACC.

AACC Executive Officers

The Executive Officers are responsible for the day-to-day operation of AACC.

President: Tamer Başar, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

The 2011 officers are:

Past President: B. Wayne Bequette, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

President Elect: R. Russell Rhinehart, Oklahoma State University
Treasurer: Jordan Berg, Texas Tech University
Secretary: Pradeep Misra, Wright State University

Member Society Directors

Each member society of AACC is represented on the Board of Directors by its Society Di-
rector. The term of office for each Member Society Director is two years.
The 2011 AACC Member Societies and their Directors are:
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA)
Jurek Z. Sasiadek, Carleton University
American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE)
Masoud Soroush, Drexel University
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)
Erik A. Johnson, University of Southern California
American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)
Jeffrey Stein, University of Michigan
The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)
Christos Cassandras, Boston University
The International Society of Automation (ISA)
Karlene Hoo, Texas Tech University
Society for Modeling & Simulation International (SCS)
Robert P. Judd, Ohio University
Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics (SIAM)
William S. Levine, University of Maryland

43
 APPENDIX B: AMERICAN AUTOMATIC CONTROL COUNCIL OFFICERS

APPENDIX B The complete AACC leadership teams have been,

President Vice President Secretary Treasurer

American Automatic Control Council Officers
1957 Rufus Oldenburger John Johnson, Jr. William Vannah William Vannah
The IFAC National Member Organization (NMO) for the United States is the American Auto- 1958-60 Rufus Oldenburger John Lozier William Vannah William Vannah
matic Control Council (AACC). AACC was organized in 1957, and the first meeting was held 1961 John Lozier David Boyd William Vannah William Vannah
March 16, 1957—prior to the first organizational meeting which officially formed IFAC. 1962-63 Harold Chestnut William Vannah Gerald Weiss Gerald Weiss
1964-65 John Ward Ted Williams Gerald Weiss Gerald Weiss
The initial founding societies of AACC included the American Society of Mechanical Engi- 1966-67 Ted Williams Hugo Shuck Gerald Weiss Gerald Weiss
neers (ASME), American Institute of Electrical Engineers (AIEE), Institute of Radio Engi- 1968-69 Hugo Shuck Charles Doolittle Gerald Weiss William Vannah
neers (IRE), Instrument Society of America (ISA), and the American Institute of Chemical 1970-71 Charles Doolittle Duane McRuer Gerald Weiss William Vannah
Engineers (AIChE). 1972-73 Duane McRuer Nathaniel Nichols I. J. Shapiro William Vannah
Today, the member societies of AACC are: 1974-75 Nathaniel Nichols Roland Lex I. J. Shapiro John Bernard
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) 1976-77 Roland Lex Bernard Morgan I. J. Shapiro John Bernard
American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE) 1978-79 Bernard Morgan John Zaborszky Marion Keyes John Bernard
1980-81 John Zaborszky Tom Stout Marion Keyes John Bernard
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)
1982-83 Tom Stout Michael Rabins William Miller Mal Beaverstock
American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) 1984-85 Michael Rabins Robert Larson William Miller Mal Beaverstock
The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) 1986-87 Robert Larson William Powers William Miller Mal Beaverstock
1988-89 William Powers Thomas Edgar William Miller Mal Beaverstock
The International Society of Automation (ISA)
1990-91 Thomas Edgar J. Boyd Pearson Abe Haddad Mal Beaverstock
Society for Modeling & Simulation International (SCS)
1992-93 J. Boyd Pearson Dagfinn Gangsaas Abe Haddad Mal Beaverstock
Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics (SIAM) 1994-95 Dagfinn Gangsaas William Perkins Abe Haddad Mal Beaverstock
1996-97 William Perkins Masayoshi Tomizuka Abe Haddad Mal Beaverstock
1998-99 Masayoshi Tomizuka Naim Kheir Abe Haddad Mal Beaverstock
AACC Officers
2000-01 Naim Kheir Christos Georgakis Abe Haddad Mal Beaverstock
Over the years, there have been 27 presidents of AACC, and since 1962, each
2002-03 Christos Georgakis William E. Levine Abe Haddad Mal Beaverstock
president has served a two-year term. Of particular note, AACC has greatly benefited from
2004-05 William E. Levine A. Galip Ulsoy Pradeep Misra Russell Rhinehart
several secretaries and treasurers who served extensive periods. These include the follow-

Tamer Başar
2006-07 A. Galip Ulsoy B. Wayne Bequette Pradeep Misra Russell Rhinehart
ing who served eight or more years:

Tamer Başar
2008-09 B. Wayne Bequette Pradeep Misra Russell Rhinehart
• William Vannah who served five years as secretary & treasurer, two years as vice presi-
2010-11 Russell Rhinehart Pradeep Misra Jordan Berg
dent, and another six years as treasurer a few years later. Vannah’s career affiliation was
with Control Engineering Magazine.
• Gerald Weiss (Brooklyn Polytechnic Institute) who served ten years as secretary and six
years as treasurer.
• William Miller (General Electric Company, retired) who served eight years as secretary.
• Mal Beaverstock (The Foxboro Company) who served over 23 years as treasurer.
• Abe Haddad (Northwestern University) who served 14 years as secretary.

Pradeep Misra (Wright State University) is currently serving in his eighth year as
secretary while Jordan Berg (Texas Tech University) is in his third year as treasurer.
44 45
 APPENDIX C: IFAC AWARD WINNERS FROM THE UNITED STATES

The Industrial Achievement Award: The recipient of this award is selected by the IFAC
APPENDIX C Council to recognize an individual, or a team of individuals, who has made a significant
contribution to industrial applications of control. The first Industrial Achievement Award
was presented in 2002; only three medals have been made to date—none to any
IFAC Award Winners from the United States individual or team from the United States.

The aim of IFAC is to promote the science and technology of control in the broadest The High Impact Paper Award: Acknowledges the impact of papers published in any
possible sense. A significant part of this promotion is the granting of IFAC medals, of the official IFAC journals on the broad areas of automatic control theory and applica-
awards, and prizes to recognize outstanding accomplishments and contributions to the tion. The first High Impact Paper Award will be presented in 2011. Two of the authors
control field. Numerous recipients of the IFAC awards have been from the United States. of the paper selected for this award are from the United States: James B. Rawlings and
Christopher V. Rao. Full citation of the paper is:
IFAC Major Medals and Awards D.Q. Mayne, J. B. Rawlings, C. V. Rao, and P. O. Scokaert.
IFAC has four major medals, Constrained model predictive control: Stability and optimality.
• Giorgio Quazza Medal Automatica, 36(6):789-814, 2000.
• Nathaniel B. Nichols Medal
• Industrial Achievement Award Harold Chestnut Control Engineering Textbook Prize
• High Impact Paper Award This award is presented at IFAC World Congresses for the best control engineering
textbook in one of the official IFAC languages for which the first edition(s) occurred not
The Giorgio Quazza Medal: Presented at IFAC World Congresses to a distinguished later than the Congress just prior to the one at which the award is presented. The award
control engineer. The recipient is selected by the IFAC Council as a memorial to the late recognizes author(s) of textbook(s) judged to have most contributed to the education of
Giorgio Quazza—a leading Italian control engineer. The first Quazza Medal was presented control engineers.
in 1981.
The first Chestnut Control Engineering Textbook Prize was presented in 1987.
Petar Kokotović, 1990
The Quazza Medal winners from the United States are:

Tamer Başar, 2005

The winning books with at least one author from the United States are:

1990: Gene F. Franklin, J. David Powell, Abbas Emami-Naeini, Feedback

The Nathaniel B. Nichols Medal: Recognizes outstanding contributions of an Control of Dynamic Systems, Prentice Hall, 1986
individual to design methods, software tools and instrumentation, or to significant
projects resulting in major applications and advancement of control education. The recipi- 1999: Christos G. Cassandras, Discrete Event Systems: Modeling and
ent is selected by the IFAC Council in the name of Nathaniel Nichols—one of the pioneers Performance Analysis, R.D. Irwin, Inc. and Aksen Associates, Inc., 1993
of control engineering. The first Nichols Medal was presented in 1996.
The Nichols Medal winners from the United States are: 2002: Hassan K. Khalil, Nonlinear Systems, Prentice Hall, 1996
Gunter Stein, 1999
Carl Nett, 2002 2011: Karl Johan Aström, Richard Murray, Feedback Systems: An Introduction
William Powers, 2005 for Scientists and Engineers, Princeton University Press, 2008
Siva Banda, 2011

46 47
 APPENDIX C: IFAC AWARD WINNERS FROM THE UNITED STATES APPENDIX C: IFAC AWARD WINNERS FROM THE UNITED STATES

IFAC Fellows Outstanding Service Award

The IFAC Fellow Award is granted to persons who have made outstanding and The Outstanding Service Award is presented to IFAC officials who have served and
extraordinary contributions in the field of interest of IFAC— in the role as an contributed substantially to IFAC in various capacities, according to criteria set by the
Engineer/Scientist, Technical Leader, or Educator. The first IFAC Fellows were elected IFAC Council. From 1990 to 2008, there have been 17 officials from the United States who
at the 2005 World Congress in Prague. The next IFAC Fellows will be announced at the have received the award. The next awards will be presented at the World Congress in
2011 Congress in Milan. 2011.

The following are the IFAC Fellows elected from the United States: 1990 2002
John Aseltine Robert Bitmead

Tamer Başar
2005 2008 George Axelby Michael Masten
Richard Braatz Harold Chestnut

Tamer Başar
Robert Bitmead Xi-Ren Cao1 Janos Gertler 2005
János Gertler Christos Cassandras Stephen Kahne

Petar Kokotović
Stephen Kahne Thomas Edgar John Lozier Abraham Haddad
Abraham Haddad William Miller
Carl Nett Miroslav Krstic Andrew Sage 2008
William F. Powers Frank Lewis Austin Spang Christos Georgakis
Gunter Stein Manfred Morari2 Thomas McAvoy
Michael Safonov 1993 Shimon Nof
2006 William Levine
Michael Athans 2009
Davor Hrovat Francis Doyle
Petros Ioannou Tzyh Jong Tarn
Michael Masten
Thomas McAvoy 2010
Panos Antsaklis
2007 Siva Banda
Jose B. Cruz, Jr. B. Ross Barmish
Christos Georgakis Chris Byrnes3
Hassan Khalil Tyrone Duncan
Jessy Grizzle
Mustafa Khammash
Andrew Teel
Masayoshi Tomizuka
A. Galip Ulsoy

1
Xi-Ren Cao now resides in Hong Kong
2
From the United States, Manfred Morari now resides in Switzerland
3
Chris Byrnes Fellow Award granted posthumously

48 49
 APPENDIX D: AACC AWARD WINNERS

APPENDIX D The Control Engineering Practice Award

The Control Engineering Practice Award is given to an individual or team for significant
contribution to the advancement of control practice. The primary criterion for selection is
application and implementation of innovative control concepts, methodology, and tech-
AACC Award Winners nology, or for planning, design, manufacture, and operation of control systems. The con-
tribution must have been made while the individual or at least one member of the team
The American Automatic Control Council (AACC) sponsors five awards. These awards was a resident of the United States.
are given to recognize excellence in scientific, technological, or educational
contributions to automatic control. Winners of the Control Engineering Practice Award are:

Charlie R. Cutler, 1998 George W. Meyer, 2005

The Richard E. Bellman Control Heritage Award
Davor D. Hrovat, 1999 David S. Bayard, 2006
The Bellman Award is given for distinguished career contributions to the theory or
F. Greg Shinskey, 2000 Kevin A. Wise, 2007
application of automatic control. It is the highest AACC recognition of professional
Warren A. Thompson, 2001 Babatunde A. Ogunnaike, 2008
achievement for control systems engineers and scientists. The recipient must have
Dagfinn Gangsaas, 2002 Suresh M. Joshi, 2009
spent a significant part of his/her career in the United States.
Edgar Bristol, 2003 Joseph Z. Lu, 2010
William F. Powers, 2004 Steven E. Shladover, 2011
Winners of the Bellman Award are:

Hendrik W. Bode, 1979 Elmer G. Gilbert, 1996

Nathaniel B. Nichols, 1980 Rudolf E. Kalman, 1997
Charles Stark Draper, 1981 Lofti A. Zadeh, 1998
Irving Lefkowitz, 1982 Yu-Chi Ho, 1999
John V. Breakwell, 1983 W. Harmon Ray, 2000

Petar V. Kokotović, 2002

Richard E. Bellman, 1984 A. V. Balakrishnan, 2001
Harold Chestnut, 1985
John Zaborszky, 1986 Kumpati S. Narenda, 2003
John Lozier, 1987 Harold J. Kushner, 2004

Tamer Başar, 2006

Walter R. Evans, 1988 Gene F. Franklin, 2005
Roger W. Brockett, 1989
Arthur E. Bryson, Jr., 1990 Sanjoy K. Mitter, 2007
John G. Truxal, 1991 Pravin Varaiya, 2008
Rutherford Aris, 1992 George Leitmann, 2009
Eliahu I. Jury, 1993 Dragoslav D. Šiljak, 2010
Jose B. Cruz, Jr., 1994 Manfred Morari, 2011
Michael Athans, 1995

50 51
 APPENDIX D: AACC AWARD WINNERS APPENDIX D: AACC AWARD WINNERS

The Donald P. Eckman Award The John R. Ragazzini Award

The Eckman Award recognizes an outstanding young engineer in the field of automatic The Ragazzini Award is given to recognize outstanding contributions to automatic
control. The recipient must be younger than 35 years on January 1 of the year of award. control education in any form. These contributions can be from any source and in any
Contributions may be technical or scientific publications, theses, patents, inventions, or media, i.e., electronic, publications, courses, or other.
combinations of the above in the field of automatic control made while the nominee was
a resident of the United States. Winners of the Ragazzini Award are:

Winners of the Eckman Award are: John R. Ragazzini, 1979 David M. Auslander, 1996
Michael Athans, 1980 William R. Perkins, 1997
Michael Athans, 1964 Bijoy K. Ghosh, 1988 Yasundo Takahashi, 1981 Peter Dorato, 1998
John Bollinger, 1965 Pramod P. Khargonekar, 1989 Arthur E. Bryson, Jr., 1982 Katsuhiko Ogata, 1999
Roger Bakke, 1966 S. Shankar Sastry, 1990 Charles A. Desoer, 1983 Hassan K. Khalil, 2000
Roger W. Brockett, 1967 Carl N. Nett, 1991 Henry M. Paynter, 1984 Dimitri P. Bertsekas, 2001
Robert E. Larson, 1968 Stephen P. Boyd, 1992 No Award, 1985 Robert F. Stengel, 2002
W. Harmon Ray, 1969 Munther A. Dahleh, 1993 Thomas Kailath, 1986 Stephen P. Boyd, 2003
John Seinfeld, 1970 Kameshwar Poola, 1994 George J. Thaler, 1987 Mark W. Spong, 2004
Raman Mehra, 1971 Andrew Packard, 1995 Wallace E. Vander Velde, 1988 S. Shankar Sastry, 2005
Cecil L. Smith, 1972 Jeff S. Shamma, 1996 W. Harmon Ray, 1989 Masayoshi Tomizuka, 2006
Edison Tse, 1973 Richard M. Murray, 1997 Kumpati S.Narendra, 1990 Manfred Morari, 2007
Timothy L. Johnson, 1974 Ioannis Kanellakopoulos, 1998 Michael J. Rabins, 1991 Stephen Yurkovich, 2008
Alan S. Willsky, 1975 Andrew R. Teel, 1999 Thomas F. Edgar, 1992 George Stephanopoulos, 2009
Robert W. Atherton, 1976 Richard D. Braatz, 2000 Dale E. Seborg, 1993 Tzyh Jong Tarn, 2010
Nils R. Sandell Jr., 1977 Dawn M. Tilbury, 2001 No Award, 1994 James B. Rawlings, 2011
Narendra K. Gupta, 1978 Ilya Kolmanovsky, 2002 J. Boyd Pearson, 1995
Joe Hong Chow, 1979 Claire J. Tomlin, 2003
Manfred Morari, 1980 Panagiotis D. Christofides, 2004
Rajan Suri, 1981 Pablo A. Parrilo, 2005
Bruce Hajek, 1982 Murat Arcak, 2006
John C. Doyle, 1983 Daniel Liberzon, 2007
Mark A. Shayman, 1984 Asuman E. Ozdaglar, 2008
P.R. Kumar, 1985 Paulo Tabuada, 2009
Yaman Arkun, 1986 Domitilla Del Vecchio, 2010
Rahmatallah Shoureshi, 1987 Hana El-Samad, 2011

52 53
 APPENDIX D: AACC AWARD WINNERS APPENDIX D: AACC AWARD WINNERS

The O. Hugo Schuck Award 1995 J. Chai, R. H. Lyon, and J. H. Lang, “Non-Invasive Diagnostics of Motor-
The Hugo Schuck Award is given to recognize the best paper(s) presented at the previous Operated Valves”
American Control Conference (ACC). In some years, two awards are presented; one F. Paganini, R. D'Andrea, and J. C. Doyle, “Behavioral Approach to Robustness
award is for a paper emphasizing contributions to theory, the other emphasizing signifi- Analysis”
cant or innovative applications. Criteria for selection include the quality of the written 1996 M. Krstic, “Asymptotic properties of Adaptive Nonlinear Stabilizer”
and oral presentation, the technical contribution, timeliness, and practicality. 1997 No Awards
1998 V. Lioatta, C. Georgakis, and M. S. El-Aasser, “Real-Time Estimation and
Winners of the Schuck Award are: Control of Particle Size in Semi-Batch Emulsion Polymerization”
M. Glaum and G. Zames, “A function Calculus For Identification and System
1980 W. B. Rouse, “Understanding and Aiding the Human in Fault Diagnosis Analysis”
Tasks” 1999 S. Tatiraju, M. Soroush, and R. Mutharasan, “Multi-Rate Nonlinear State and
1981 T. Westerlund, “Identification and Control of an Industrial Dry Process Parameter Estimation in a Bioreactor”
Cement Kiln” H. A. Hindi, B. Hassibi, and S. P. Boyd, “Multiobjective H2/H-Infinity Optimal
1982 J. Kenneth Salisbury and J. J. Craig, “Articulated Hands:Force Control and Control via Finite Dimensional Q-Parametrization and Linear Matrix Inequalities”
Kinematic Issues” 2000 A. Armaou and P. Christofides, “Wave suppression by Nonlinear Finite-
1983 H. Johnson, “Adaptive Control of Nonlinear Self-Oscillating Systems Using Dimensional Control”
MRAS Technique” B. Bamieh and M. Dahleh, “Disturbance Energy Amplification in Three
1984 K. Glover and D.J. N. Limebeer, “Robust Multivariable Controls System Dimensional Channel Flows”
Design Using Optimal Reduced Order Plant Models” 2001 L. Zaccarian, A. R. Teel, and J. J. Marcinkowski, “Anti-windup for
1985 No Awards an Active Vibration Isolation Device: Theory and Experiments”
1986 H. Asada and K. Youcef-Toumi, “Analysis and Design of a Direct-Drive Arm R. Yedavalli, “A Necessary and Sufficient Extreme Point Solution for
with a Five-Bar Link Parallel Drive Mechanism” Checking Robust Stability of Polytopes of Matrices”
1987 B. Wahlberg, “On Model Reduction in System Identification” 2002 J. Mareczek, M. Buss, and M. Spong, “Invariance Control of Normal Forms
1988 E. Kamei, H. Namba, K. Osaki, and M. Ohba, “Application of Reduced Order with Input Driven Internal Dynamics”
Model to Automotive Engine Control System” B-S. Kim, J. Li, and T-C. Tsao, “Control of a Dual Stage Actuator System for
1989 A. Miele, T. Wang, and W.W. Melvin, “Optimization and Guidance of Noncircular Cam Turning Process”
Penetration Landing Trajectories in a Windshear” 2003 P. Seiler, A. Pant, and K. Hedrick, “Disturbance propagation in large
1990 H. Kazerooni and W.K. Foslien, “On the Control and Stability of Robots interconnected systems”
Worn By Human: Theory” 2004 B. Yao, “Integrated Direct/Indirect Adaptive Robust Control of SISO
1991 G. T. Yamaguchi and F. E. Zajac, “Modeling FES Actuation and Control of Nonlinear Systems in Semi-Strict Feedback Form”
Multisegment Limb Movements” D. Ni, Yiming Lou, P. D. Christofides, L. Sha, S. Lao, and J. P. Chang, “A
1992 E. W. Jacobsen and S. Skogestad, “Control of Unstable Distillation Method for Real-Time Control of Thin Film Composition Using OES and
Columns” XPS”
1993 K. Poolla, P. Khargonekar, A. Tikku, J. Krause, and K. Nagpal, “A Time- 2005 H.K. Khalil, “Output Feedback Sampled-Data Stabilization of Nonlinear
Domain Approach to Model Validation” Systems”
1994 H. O. Wang and E. H. Abed, “Control of Nonlinear Phenomena at the X. Sun, L. Munoz and R. Horowitz, “Mixture Kalman Filter Based Highway
Inception of Voltage Collapse” Congestion Mode and Vehicle Density Estimator and its Application”
R. J. Furness, A. Galip Ulsoy, and C. L. Wu, “Supervisory Control of Drilling”

54 55
 APPENDIX D: AACC AWARD WINNERS

The O. Hugo Schuck Award (continued) APPENDIX E

2006 N.C. Martins and M.A. Dahleh, “Fundamental Limitations of Performance in the
Presence of Finite Capacity Feedback”
T. Keviczky and G.J. Balas, “Flight Test of a Receding Horizon Controller for
United States Control Conferences
The United States has a rich and long legacy of control conferences. Planning for these
Autonomous UAV Guidance”
conferences began in the mid-1950s in conjunction with early plans and discussions for
2007 S. Dambreville, Y. Rathi, and A. Tannenbaum, “Tracking Deformable
the establishment of IFAC. Many of the same leaders who were active in IFAC discussions
Objects with Unscented Kalman Filtering and Geometric Active Contours”
also planned the early control conferences in the United States.
R. Rajamani, D. Piyabongkarn, J. Y. Lew, and J. A. Grogg, “Algorithms for
Real-Time Estimation of Individual Wheel Tire-Road Friction Coefficients”
2008 N. Motee and A. Jadbabaie, “Optimal Control of Spatially Distributed Joint American Control Conference (JACC)
Systems” Informal discussions regarding establishment of IFAC—and the National Member
L.-Shien Fong and S. Dubljevic, “Pacing Real-Time Spatiotemporal Control Organizations (NMOs)—began as early as 1956. Holding conferences was a major goal of
of Cardiac Alternans” IFAC and the NMOs from the very beginning.
2009 K. Stegath, N. Sharma, C. M. Gregory, and W. E. Dixon, “Nonlinear
Tracking Control of a Human Limb via Neuromuscular Electrical Following several planning meetings, the American Automatic Control Council (AACC)—
Stimulation” the United States NMO—held its first organizational meeting in 1957. The first major con-
R. D. Gregg and M. W. Spong, “Reduction-based Control with Application to trol conference in the United States, the National Automatic Control Conference (NACC),
Three Dimensional Bipedal Walking Robots” was then held in Dallas, Texas in 1959—one year before the first IFAC Congress. The next
2010 L. Vu and K. A. Morgansen, “Stability of Feedback Switched Systems with year (1960), AACC coordinated another conference at MIT in Cambridge; the name was
State and Switching Delays” changed to Joint Automatic Control Conference (JACC).
Y. Yan, Q. Zou, and Z. Lin, “A Control Approach to High-Speed
Probe-Based Nanofabrication” The name JACC was used for the next 22 years while the JACC experienced a steady in-
2011 F. Dörfler and F. Bullo, “Synchronization and Transient Stability in Power crease in participation from control engineers. Nevertheless, in those early years, IFAC,
Networks and Non-Uniform Kuramoto Oscillators” AACC, and the JACCs were only informally linked, and each entity operated more or less
F. Bu, H-S. Tan, and J. Huang, “Design and Field Testing of a Cooperative independently.
Adaptive Cruise Control System”
From the beginning, the JACC was conducted on an annual basis; the following are the
locations of the first 22 major United States control conferences—typically held at a suit-
able university:
1959 (NACC) Dallas, TX 1967 Philadelphia, PA 1975 No JACC—Boston IFAC ‘75
1960 Cambridge, MA 1968 Ann Arbor, MI 1976 West Lafayette, IN
1961 Boulder, CO 1969 Boulder, CO 1977 San Francisco, CA
1962 New York City, NY 1970 Atlanta, GA 1978 Philadelphia, PA
1963 Minneapolis, MN 1971 St. Louis, MO 1979 Denver, CO
1964 Palo Alto, CA 1972 Palo Alto, CA 1980 San Francisco, CA
1965 Cambridge, MA 1973 Columbus, OH 1981 Charlottesville, VA
1966 Seattle, WA 1974 Austin, TX

56 57
 APPENDIX E: UNITED STATES CONTROL CONFERENCES APPENDIX E: UNITED STATES CONTROL CONFERENCES

American Control Conference (ACC) Although all of the ACCs have been sponsored by the AACC, the relationship between the
In the early1980s the link between IFAC, the AACC, and the annual control conference early ACCs and IFAC was still unofficial. However, since 1991, all of the ACCs have been
was greatly strengthened. Beginning in 1982, the name JACC was changed to become the organized “in cooperation with IFAC”. Thus the annual ACC has now been a fully recog-
American Control Conference (ACC) and AACC became the official sponsor of the ACC. nized IFAC conference for twenty years.
Since that time, the ACCs have experienced even stronger attendance growth and an ever
increasing prestige. Today, the annual ACC is one of the most recognized control confer- The following map highlights the locations of the 1959 NACC as well as the 21 JACCs and
ences in the United States. 29 ACCs.

The ACC has been held on an annual basis, except for the year (1996) in which AACC
sponsored the IFAC Congress. Therefore, as of 2011, the AACC has organized and spon-
sored 29 successful ACC conferences. These conferences have been held in numerous lo-
cations throughout the United States—in hotel or commercial conference venues—and
have involved thousands of volunteers.
The locations for the 1982-2011 ACC were:
1982 Arlington, VA 1997 Albuquerque, NM
1983 San Francisco, CA 1998 Philadelphia, PA
1984 San Diego, CA 1999 San Diego, CA
1985 Boston, MA 2000 Chicago, IL
1986 Seattle, WA 2001 Arlington, VA
1987 Minneapolis, MN 2002 Anchorage, AK
1988 Atlanta, GA 2003 Denver, CO
1989 Pittsburgh, PA 2004 Boston, MA
1990 San Diego, CA 2005 Portland, OR
1991 Boston, MA 2006 Minneapolis, MN
1992 Chicago, IL 2007 New York City, NY Locations of NACC (1959),JACCs (1960-1981),and ACCs (1982-2011)
1993 San Francisco, CA 2008 Seattle, WA (Not shown: 2002 ACC Anchorage,Alaska)
1994 Baltimore, MD 2009 St. Louis, MO
1995 Seattle, WA 2010 Baltimore, MD
1996 No ACC—San Francisco IFAC ‘96 2011 San Francisco, CA

58 59
 APPENDIX E: UNITED STATES CONTROL CONFERENCES APPENDIX E: UNITED STATES CONTROL CONFERENCES

Over the years, the AACC has hosted the IFAC Council meetings at several of the The 98 IFAC events sponsored by the AACC have included two major IFAC
United States conferences, including, Congresses and an almost equal distribution of all other types of IFAC meetings,
• Two IFAC Congresses (1975, 1996)
1968 JACC in Ann Arbor, MI • One Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) Congress (1995)
1975 IFAC Congress in Boston, MA • 31 IFAC Symposia
1985 ACC in Boston, MA • 31 IFAC Conferences
1996 IFAC Congress in San Francisco, CA • 33 IFAC Workshops
2001 ACC in Arlington, VA
2010 ACC in Baltimore, MD The first IFAC event in the United States was held in 1968. During the subsequent 44
years, there has been an overall average 2.2 IFAC events in the United States each
IFAC Events in United States year. The average has been three IFAC events per year for the last two decades.
In addition to the 29 annual ACCs—and the preceding 22 NACC/JACCs—the AACC
has also sponsored a significant number of additional IFAC events. In fact, AACC has
sponsored more IFAC events than any other IFAC NMO. Between 1962 and 2011, the United States IFAC Events
USA sponsored 98 IFAC events—over 10% of all IFAC events in history. 1962 – 2011

Over 60% of the total number of IFAC events has been sponsored by the top eleven
IFAC NMO’s. 8

7
TOP 60.8% IFAC LOCATIONS
6
1962 – 2011
5

4
UNITED STATES 98
3
FRANCE 89

GERMANY (1) 74 2

ITALY (Tie) 52 1
JAPAN (Tie) 52
0
UNITED KINGDOM (Tie) 52

1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
AUSTRIA 50

SPAIN 33

HUNGARY 29

CHINA (Tie) 28

Poland (Tie) 28

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

1
Includes both East & West Germany before unification

60 61
 APPENDIX E: UNITED STATES CONTROL CONFERENCES APPENDIX E: UNITED STATES CONTROL CONFERENCES

United States IFAC Events 1986 Control of Distributed Parameter Systems (S) Pasadena, CA
Modeling and Control of Electric Power Plants (W) Philadelphia, PA
The first IFAC event in the United States was held in Cleveland. Since that time, the Instrumentation and Automation in Paper, Rubber,
locations have been quite diverse: Plastics and Polymerization Industries (C) Akron, OH
1988 Model Based Process Control (W) Atlanta, GA
1968 Optimal Systems Planning (S) Cleveland, OH Spacecraft Autonomy: Present and Future Capabilities (W) Pasadena, CA
1971 Interfaces with the Process Control Computer (S) Lafayette, IN 1989 Singular Perturbations and Asymptotic Methods in
1973 Regulation and Control in Physiological Systems (C) Rochester, NY Systems and Control (W) Boston, MA
Automatic Control in Glass (S) Lafayette, IN Experience with the Management of Software Projects (W) W. Lafayette, IN
1975 Control Technology in the Service of Man (Congress) Boston, MA 1991 Modeling and Experimental Verification of Dynamics
1976 Control in Transportation Systems (S) Columbus, OH and Control of Flexible Aerospace Structures (W) Huntsville, AL
Ship Operation Automation (S) Washington, DC Real Time Programming (W) Atlanta, GA
1979 PROLAMAT (C) Ann Arbor, MI Advances in Control Education ACE 91 (C) Boston, MA
Control Applications of Nonlinear Programming (W) Denver, CO American Control Conference ACC 1991 (C) Boston, MA
Distributed Computer Control Systems (S) Tampa, FL Distributed Intelligence Systems DIS '91 (S) Washington, DC
1980 Water and Related Land Resource Systems (S) Cleveland, OH Artificial Intelligence in Real-Time Control (W) Napa, CA
Spacecraft System Reconfiguration in Orbit (W) Cambridge, MA New Frontiers of Biomedical Engineering—
Spacecraft System Reconfiguration in Orbit (W) Cambridge, MA Innovations from Nuclear to Space Technology (C) Orlando, FL
Systems Engineering Applications for Industrial 1992 Modeling and Control of Biotechnical Processes (C) Keystone, CO
Energy Generation and Processes (W) Houston, TX On-Line Fault Detection and Supervision in the
1982 Control Aspects of Prosthetics and Orthotics (S) Columbus, OH Chemical Process Industries (S) Newark, DE
Identification and System Parameter Estimation SYSID 82 (S) Arlington, VA Dynamics and Control of Chemical Reactors,
IFIP Computer Applications in the Automation of Distillation Columns and Batch Processes (S) College Park, MD
Shipyard Operation and Ship Design (C) Annapolis, MD American Control Conference ACC 1992 (C) Chicago, IL
Computer Aided Design of Multivariable Automated Systems Based on Human Skill (and Intelligence)(S) Madison, WI
Technological Systems (S) W. Lafayette, IN Intelligent Manufacturing Systems IMS 92 (W) Dearborn, MI
Safety of Computer Control Systems SAFECOMP '82 (W) W. Lafayette, IN 1993 American Control Conference ACC 1993 (C) San Francisco, CA
IFAC/ Information Control Problems in AI in Economics and Management Workshop Portland, OR
Manufacturing Systems (S) Gaithersburg, MD 1994 Computer Aided Design in Control Systems CADCS '94 (S) Tucson, AZ
1983 Dynamic Modeling and Control of National Economies (C) Washington D.C. Modeling and Control of Biomedical Systems (S) Galveston, TX
Adaptive Systems in Control and Signal Processing (W) San Francisco, CA Integration of Process Design and Control—IPDC '94 (W) Baltimore, MD
Applications of Nonlinear Programming to American Control Conference ACC 1994 (C) Baltimore, MD
Optimization and Control (W) San Francisco, CA Automatic Control in Aerospace (S) Palo Alto, CA
1984 Reconfigurable Spacecraft Systems Autonomous Trends in Hydraulic and Pneumatic Components and Systems (W) Chicago, IL
and Non Autonomous (W) Cambridge, MA 1995 SAE (Soc. of Automotive Engineers) (Congress) Detroit, MI
1985 Distributed Computer Control Systems—DCCS 85 (W) Monterey, CA American Control Conference ACC 1995 (C) Seattle, WA
Model Error Concepts and Compensation (Workshop) Boston, MA Nonlinear Control Systems Design NOLCOS-95(S) Lake Tahoe, CA
Real Time Programming (W) W. Lafayette, IN Analysis, Design and Evaluation of Man-Machine ystems (S) Cambridge, MA
Contributions of Technology to International Conflict Safety and Reliability in Emerging Control Technologies (W) Daytona Beach, FL
Resolution (SWIIS) (W) Cleveland, OH Real Time Programming (20th) (W) Lauderdale, FL
1996 IFAC Congress (Congress) San Francisco, CA
62 63
 APPENDIX E: UNITED STATES CONTROL CONFERENCES APPENDIX E: UNITED STATES CONTROL CONFERENCES

United States IFAC Events (continued)

The IFAC events held in the United States have occurred in 26 of the 50 states.
The number of IFAC events held in each state is:
1997 American Control Conference ACC 1997 (C) Albuquerque, NM
1998 Advances in Automotive Control (W) Mich. State, MI
American Control Conference ACC 1998 (C) Philadelphia, PA
Artificial Intelligence in Real-Time Control—AIRTC (S) Grand Canyon, AZ
California
1999 American Control Conference ACC 1999 (C) San Diego, CA
Massachusetts
2000 Aerospace Applications of the Global Positioning System (W) Breckenridge, CO
Colorado
Lagrangian and Hamiltonian Methods for Nonlinear Control (W)Princeton, NJ
Indiana
Identification and System Parameter Estimation
Maryland
SYSID 2000 (S) Santa Barbara, CA
Ohio
American Control Conference ACC 2000 (C) Chicago, IL
Florida
2001 American Control Conference ACC 2001 (C) Arlington, VA
Illinois
Accelerator and Large Experimental Physics Control Systems (C) San Jose, CA
Michigan
Time Delay Systems (W) Santa Fe, NM
Wash DC
2002 American Control Conference (C) Anchorage, AK
Georgia
Mechatronic Systems Symposium December (C) Berkeley, CA
Oregon
2003 Control of Optical Systems (W) Breckenridge, CO
Pennsylvania
American Control Conference ACC 2003 (C) Denver, CO
New York
Fault Detection, Supervision and Safety of Technical
Arizona
Processes- SAFEPROCESS (S) Washington
Texas
American Control Conference ACC 2004 (C) Boston, MA
Virginia
2004 Dynamics and Control of Process Systems DYCOPS7 (S) Cambridge, MA
New Mexio
Modeling and Control of National Economies (S) Redlands, CA
New Jersey
Analysis, Design, and Evaluation of Human-Machine Systems (S) Atlanta, GA
Delaware
2005 American Control Conference ACC 2005 (C) Portland, OR
Missouri
Foundations of Systems Biology in Engineering (C) Santa Barbara, CA
Minnesota
2006 American Control Conference ACC 2006 (C) Minneapolis, MN
Wisconsin
2007 American Control Conference ACC 2007 (C) New York, NY
Alabama
Advances in Automotive Control (S) Aptos, CA
Alaska
2008 American Control Conference ACC 2008 (C) Seattle, WA
2009 American Control Conference ACC 2009 (C) St. Louis, MO 0 5 10 15 20
Foundations of Systems Biology in Engineering (C) Denver, CO
Control in Transportation Systems—CTS 09 (S) Redondo Beach, CA
Bio-Robotics, Information Technology and Intelligent
Control for Bioproduction Systems (W) Champaign, IL
Networked Robotics (W) Golden, CO
2010 Internet Based Control Education (IBCE 10)(W) Orlando, FL
American Control Conference ACC 2010 (C) Baltimore, MD
Mechatronic Systems (S) Boston, MA
2011 American Control Conference ACC 2011 (C) San Francisco, CA
64 65
 APPENDIX F: UNITED STATES RESIDENTS SERVING IFAC

APPENDIX F TOTAL NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS SERVING AS IFAC LEADERS

1957 – 2011

United States Residents Serving IFAC The number of residents serving from any country at any given time obviously varies
from triennium to triennium. Nevertheless, the total number of Americans who have
served IFAC generally increased in every triennium following IFAC’s formation up until
There were several Americans among the original founders of IFAC, and since the
the late 1980s. After a brief dip in the early 1990s, the growth resumed, and during the
formation of IFAC, numerous United States residents have served as significant leaders
last two decades, the number of leaders from the United States has averaged 22.9
and volunteers during every triennium of IFAC history. In the current 2008-2011
volunteers each triennium.
triennium, there are over 100 United States residents serving in various IFAC positions.

IFAC Leaders USA 105

Dedicated service from willing and eager volunteers is one of the key reasons that IFAC
has become such a successful organization. Unfortunately, records are not available Germany* 42
to tabulate the several thousands of people—of all nations—who have served as mem-
Japan 41
bers of International Program Committees (IPCs) for the many technical meetings within
IFAC’s history. Statistics likewise do not identify the numerous people who have UK 39
served as members of the various IFAC Technical Committees.
France 36

However, records have been maintained for the leaders of the IFAC Technical USSR/Russia 33
Committees and the IFAC Administrative Committees as well as the editors of the
Italy 25
various IFAC journals. Service of these specific leaders can be separated into several
distinct categories: Australia 17
China 16
• Technical Committee Leader: Chair or Vice Chair of an IFAC Technical Committee
• Editor: Editor or Editor-in-Chief of an IFAC Journal Hungary 15
• Administrative Committee Member/Leader: Member, Chair, or Vice Chair of an IFAC
Netherlands 15
Administrative Committee
• IFAC Officers and Advisors: IFAC President, IFAC Vice President, IFAC Council Mem- Sweden 15
ber, or IFAC Advisor

During IFAC’s history, all of the NMOs have provided such leaders; from the United 0 20 40 60 80 100 120
States, there have been over 100 different volunteers who have served in these
leadership positions. * Includes both East & West Germany before unification

66 67
 APPENDIX F: UNITED STATES RESIDENTS SERVING IFAC APPENDIX F: UNITED STATES RESIDENTS SERVING IFAC

UNITED STATES IFAC LEADERS United States Resident Leaders

Most United States residents who have served in IFAC leadership roles have
individually served for a significant numbers of years. The following charts identify the
time span for each of the 105 USA residents who have served as an IFAC leader during
40 the last half century. Many of the individuals are readily recognized as significant
35 scientists, authors, and innovators within the automatic control field.
30
25
Rufus Oldenburger
20
15 Harold Chestnut

10 Donald P. Eckman
5 James Mozley
0 William E. Miller
1956 19571959 1961 1963 1966 1969 1972 1975 1978 1981 1984 1987 1990 1993 1996 1999 2002 2005 2011
John C. Lozier
Henry L. Mason
Number of United States Residents Serving in IFAC Leadership Positions
John A. Aseltine
John Truxal
George S. Axelby
Leon Kirchmayer
Petar Kokotović
J. Lowen Shearer
Nat Cohn
Gene F. Franklin
Stephen Kahne
Charles M. Doolittle
Janos Gertler
Walter Haeussermann
Roland G. Lex
Phillip A. Sprague
Michael Athans
Donald R. Bristol
Henry Kelley
Irving Lefkowitz

1957

1963

1969

1975

1981

1987

1993

1999

2005

2011

2017
68 69
 APPENDIX F: UNITED STATES RESIDENTS SERVING IFAC APPENDIX F: UNITED STATES RESIDENTS SERVING IFAC

United States Resident Leaders (continued)

James L. Nevins Thomas Sheridan

Eli Nisenfeld Yaman Arkun

George N. Saridis Tamer Başar

Herman R. Weed Peter Dorato

Daniel B. DeBra Michael K. Masten

John H. Dockstader Francis Doyle

Jose B. Cruz Jr. Christos Georgakis

R. A. Curran Chris Hollot

Thomas F. Edgar Davor Hrovat

Alexander H. Levis Jerrel Mitchell

Andrew Sage Satish C. Mojleji

Yaakov Bar Shalom Shimon Nof

Tomas DyLiacco David Russell

T. J. Harrison Theodore Williams

William S. Levine Panos J. Antsaklis

William Perkins Hassan K. Khalil

Herbert W. Rauch Fred Kile

Karl N. Reid Frank L. Lewis

Austin Spang III N. R. Ricker

Abraham Haddad Giorgio Rizzoni

Yakov Y. Haimes Janusz Zalewski

William F. Powers Evelyn Brown

Michael J. Rabins Christos Cassandras

Robert E. Skelton S. Joe Qin

Jason L. Speyer Masayoshi Tomizuka

Gregory H. Suski Kazuo Yamazaki

Mark D. Ardema Petros Ioannou

Azmi Kaya Miroslav Krstic

Ken Lorell Pradeep Misra

Thomas J. McAvoy Tariq Samad

J. Boyd Pearson Andre Tits

1957

1963

1969

1975

1981

1987

1993

1999

2005

2011

2017
1957

1963

1969

1975

1981

1987

1993

1999

2005

2011

2017

70 71
 APPENDIX F: UNITED STATES RESIDENTS SERVING IFAC APPENDIX F: UNITED STATES RESIDENTS SERVING IFAC

United States Resident Leaders (continued)

Not only have United States volunteers individually served for lengthy tenures, but many
Edmond Jonckheere have served in multiple IFAC leadership roles.
Angie Bukley
Anastasios Chassiakos Technical Committee Leader: 76% of the 105 United States residents who have
served IFAC have held leadership positions (chair, vice chair) in IFAC Technical
Magnus Egerstedt
Committees:
Robert X. Gao
Hoshin Vijai Gupta Panos J. Antsaklis T. J. Harrison Shimon Nof
Joao Pedro Hespanha Mark D. Ardema Joao Pedro Hespanha Rufus Oldenburger
John A. Aseltine Chris Hollot Bozenna Pasik-Duncan
Roberto Horowitz
Michael Athans Roberto Horowitz J. Boyd Pearson
Faryar Jabbar
Yaakov Bar Shalom Petros Ioannou Huei Peng
Wei Kang Donald R. Bristol Faryar Jabbari William Perkins
Kwang Y. Lee Angie Bukley Stephen Kahne William F. Powers
Lucy Pao Anastasios Chassiakos Wei Kang Michael J. Rabins
Christos Cassandras Azmi Kaya Herbert W. Rauch
Bozenna Pasik-Duncan
Harold Chestnut Henry Kelley Karl N. Reid
Huei Peng Nat Cohn Giorgio Rizzoni
Fred Kile
Larry Whitman
Petar Kokotović
Jose B. Cruz Jr. Leon Kirchmayer Andrew Sage
Mengchu Zhou R. A. Curran George N. Saridis
Andrew Teel Daniel B. DeBra Kwang Y. Lee J. Lowen Shearer
J. Dockstader Irving Lefkowitz Thomas Sheridan
Douglas A. Bristow
Charles M. Doolittle William S. Levine Robert E. Skelton
Francis Doyle Alexander H. Levis Jason L. Speyer
1957

1963

1969

1975

1981

1987

1993

1999

2005

2011

2017
Tomas DyLiacco Roland G. Lex P. S. Sprague
Thomas F. Edgar Ken Lorell Gregory H. Suski
Magnus Egerstedt Henry L. Mason Masayoshi Tomizuka
Gene F. Franklin Thomas J. McAvoy John Truxal
Christos Georgakis William E. Miller Herman R. Weed
Janos Gertler Jerrel Mitchell Larry Whitman
Hoshin Vijai Gupta Satish C. Mojleji Theodore Williams
Abraham Haddad James Mozley Janusz Zalewski
Yakov Y. Haimes James L. Nevins Mengchu Zhou
Walter Haeussermann Eli Nisenfeld

72 73
 APPENDIX F: UNITED STATES RESIDENTS SERVING IFAC APPENDIX F: UNITED STATES RESIDENTS SERVING IFAC

Editor: 31% of the United States residents have served as editor or editor-in-chief for Current United States Resident Volunteers
IFAC Journals,
Whereas there have been 105 United States residents who have served in leadership
Yaman Arkun Davor Hrovat N. L. Ricker positions during the history of IFAC, there have been an undetermined number of

Tamer Başar
George S. Axelby Edmond Jonckheere David Russell additional individuals from the United States who have volunteered in lesser, but
Stephen Kahne Andrew Sage nevertheless significant IFAC service positions—such as members of the IFAC
Douglas A. Bristow Hassan K. Khalil Tariq Samad Technical Committees or members of numerous International Program Committees
Evelyn Brown Miroslav Krstic George N. Saridis (IPCs).
Peter Dorato William S. Levine Austin Spang III
Francis Doyle Alexander H. Levis Andrew Teel We have no count for the number of people serving in IPCs. However, in the current
Robert X. Gao Frank L. Lewis Andre Tits 2008-2011 triennium, there are over one hundred United States residents serving in
Christos Georgakis Michael K. Masten Theodore Williams various other volunteer IFAC positions. These positions impact virtually every IFAC
Janos Gertler Thomas J. McAvoy Kazuo Yamazaki activity,
Chris Hollot S. Joe Qin Janusz Zalewski
• Executive Boards and Committees
Administrative Committee Member/Leader: 28% of the United States resident • Technical Board and Committees
leaders have served in the IFAC Administrative Committees, • IFAC Journal Editors

All of the current IFAC Boards – and all but one of the current IFAC Committees—
Tamer Başar
John A. Aseltine Abraham Haddad James L. Nevins
contain members from the United States.
Petar Kokotović
Stephen Kahne Shimon Nof
Donald R. Bristol Rufus Oldenburger
Harold Chestnut Irving Lefkowitz Lucy Pao Executive Boards and Committees: Ten United States residents currently serve on
Nat Cohn Roland G. Lex Bozenna Pasik-Duncan the various executive boards and committees. Many of the residents serve in multiple
Jose B. Cruz Jr. John C. Lozier William F. Powers board and committee responsibilities. With the exception of the Policy Committee, all
Charles M. Doolittle Michael K. Masten Michael J. Rabins current IFAC executive committees have United States members.
Donald P. Eckman Thomas J. McAvoy Herbert W. Rauch IFAC Council
Christos Georgakis William E. Miller Masayoshi Tomizuka Ordinary Member Abraham Haddad
Janos Gertler Pradeep Misra Advisor Janos Gertler
Advisor Stephen J. Kahne
Advisor Michael K. Masten
IFAC Officers and Advisors: 9% of the United States volunteers have served as
Executive Board
IFAC Officers and/or IFAC Advisors,
Ex Officio Masayoshi Tomizuka

Harold Chestnut Abraham Haddad Michael K. Masten Publications Management Board

Nat Cohn Stephen Kahne William E. Miller Chair Stephen J. Kahne
Janos Gertler John C. Lozier Rufus Oldenburger Elsevier Representative Janos Gertler
Ex Officio Masayoshi Tomizuka

74 75
 APPENDIX F: UNITED STATES RESIDENTS SERVING IFAC APPENDIX F: UNITED STATES RESIDENTS SERVING IFAC

Executive Committees Technical Board and Technical Committees: The IFAC Technical Board consists of
nine Coordinating Committees and 40 Technical Committees organized within the
Administrative & Finance Committee
Coordinating Committees. United States residents serve as members or leaders within
Vice Chair Abraham Haddad
all nine Coordinating Committees. In addition, United States residents hold
Awards Committee membership in 29 of the 40 Technical Committees (72.5%). In total, there are 86

Tamer Başar
Textbook Prize Bozenna Pasik-Duncan United States individuals currently serving as members of the IFAC Technical
Quazza Medal Committees. Some of the 86 individuals are members of multiple Technical
Young Author Prize Lucy Pao Committees—such that the United States accounts for 101 membership positions within
Publications Committee the committees. Four of the Technical Committee Chairs, and ten of the Technical
Chair Masayoshi Tomizuka Committee Vice-Chairs, are United States residents.
Vice Chair Thomas J. McAvoy Technical Board
Member Pradeep Misra Member Thomas J. McAvoy
Young Author Prize Lucy Pao
Technical Coordinating Committees & Technical Committees
Publications Committee CC 1 - Systems & Signals
Chair Masayoshi Tomizuka TC 1.1 Modeling, Identification & Signal Processing
Vice Chair Thomas J. McAvoy Er Wei Bai
Member Pradeep Misra Jie Chen

Tamer Başar
Member Bozena Pasik-Duncan Tyrone Duncan
Ex Officio Guoxiang Gu
Ex Officio Janos Gertler Robert Kosut
Ex Officio Stephen J. Kahne Daniel Rivera
Roy Smith
Le Yi Wang
TC 1.2 Adaptive and Learning Systems
S.N. Balakrishnan
Bozenna Pasik-Duncan
Tyrone Duncan
TC 1.3 Discrete Event and Hybrid Systems
Magnus Egerstedt TC Vice Chair
Calin Belta
Spyros Reveliotis
Paulo Tabuada
Bert Tanner
Yorai Wardi
Mengchu Zhou
TC 1.5 Networked Systems
Joao Pedro Hespanha TC Vice Chair
P.R. Kumar
Sanjoy Mitter
Kameshwar Poolla

76 77
 APPENDIX F: UNITED STATES RESIDENTS SERVING IFAC APPENDIX F: UNITED STATES RESIDENTS SERVING IFAC

Technical Board and Technical Committees (continued)

CC 2 - Design Methods CC 5 - Manufacturing and Logistics Systems

TC 2.1 Control Design TC 5.1 Manufacturing Plant Control
Oscar D. Crisalle Timothy Johnson
TC 2.2 Linear Control Systems Jay Lee
Jie Chen Yuming Zhang
TC 2.3 Non-Linear Control Systems Jeff Stein
Wei Kang TC Vice Chair TC 5.2 Manufacturing Modeling for Management and Control
John Hauser Jeff Stein
Zhong-Ping Jiang TC 5.3 Enterprise Integration and Networking
Nikolaos K. Kazantzis Larry Whitman TC Vice Chair
Miroslav Krstic TC 5.4 Large Scale Complex Systems
Eduardo A. Misawa Andrew P. Sage
Karl Hedrick CC 6 - Process and Power Systems
TC 2.5 Robust Control TC 6.1 Chemical Process Control
Faryar Jabbari TC Chair Francis J. Doyle III TC Chair
Karl Hedrick Panagiotis Christofides
Daniel Liberzon Prodromos Daoutidis
CC 3 - Computers, Cognition and Communication Michael A. Henson
TC 3.1 Computers for Control Jay H. Lee
Janusz Zalewski Michael J. Piovoso
TC 3.3 Telematics: Control via Communication Networks David R. Vinson
Kevin L. Moore TC 6.3 Power Plants and Power Systems
Steve Rock Kwang Y. Lee TC Vice Chair
Paul Schenker Atif Debs
Glenn Masada
CC 4 - Mechatronics, Robotics and Components
TC 6.4 Fault Detection,Supervision & Safety of Technical Processes-
TC 4.1 Components and Technologies for Control
SAFEPROCESS
Roberto Horowitz
Janos Gertler
Masayoshi Tomizuka
Pieter Mosterman
TC 4.2 Mechatronic Systems
Giorgio Rizzoni
Masayoshi Tomizuka TC Chair
Huei Peng TC Vice Chair CC 7 - Transportation and Vehicle Systems
George T.C. Chiu TC 7.1 Automotive Control
Pieter Mosterman Giorgio Rizzoni TC Vice Chair
TC 4.3 Robotics Karl Hedrick
Mo-Yuen Chow Nazli Kahveci
Masayoshi Tomizuka Annalisa Scaccioli
TC 4.5 Human Machine Systems Hongtei Eric Tsent
Alex Kirlik John Wagner
Alexander Levis Yue-Yun Wang
Amy Pritchett Huei Peng
Daniel Repperger
Andrew P. Sage
78 79
 APPENDIX F: UNITED STATES RESIDENTS SERVING IFAC APPENDIX F: UNITED STATES RESIDENTS SERVING IFAC

Technical Board and Technical Committees (continued)

TC 7.3 Aerospace IFAC Editorial Boards: IFAC publishes six journals, and there are United States
Angie Bukley TC Vice Chair residents currently serving on each of the editorial boards. In total, there are 16 United
Mark Balas States residents on the boards. The editor-in-chief of two of the boards is a United
Daniel B. Debra States resident, as is one of the deputy editors-in-chief.
Rees Fullmer
Walter Haeussermann
Tamer Başar
Automatica
Jonathan P. How Editor-in-Chief
John W. Hursh Editor Andrew R. Teel
Sungwam Kim Editor Andre Tits
Jerrel R. Mitchell Editor Miroslav Krstic
Brett Newman
Editor Edmond Jonckheere
Fitz-Coy Norman
Editor Manfred Morari (through April 2011)
John D. Schierman
Editor John Baillieul (from May 2011)
David K. Schmidt
Ex Officio Stephen J. Kahne
Sherman M. Seltzer
Control Engineering Practice
TC 7.4 Transportation Systems
Editor Davor Hrovat
Anastasios Chassiakos
CC 8 - Bio- and Ecological Systems Editor Tariq Samad (through 2010)
TC 8.2 Biological and Medical Systems Ex Officio Stephen J. Kahne
Francis J. Doyle III Annual Reviews in Control
B. Wayne Bequette Editor-in-Chief Janos Gertler
TC 8.3 Modeling and Control of Environmental Systems Deputy Editor-in-Chief Janusz Zalewski
Hoshin Vijai Gupta TC Vice Chair Editor Christos Georgakis
Aris Georgakakos Editor Chris Hollot
TC 8.4 Biosystems and Bioprocesses Ex Officio Stephen J. Kahne
Francis J. Doyle III Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence
Editor Evelyn Brown (through 2009)
CC 9 - Social Systems
TC 9.1. Economic and Business Systems Ex Officio Stephen J. Kahne
Mengchu Zhou TC Vice Chair Journal of Process Control
TC 9.4. Control Education Regional Editor N. L. Ricker
Bozenna Pasik-Duncan TC Chair Regional Editor Francis J. Doyle III (through 2009)
Ex Officio Stephen J. Kahne
Mechatronics
Associate Editor Douglas A. Bristow
Associate Editor Robert X. Gao
Associate Editor Kazuo Yamazaki

80 81