PhD Thesis in Department of Mechanical Engineering at UKZN : S. Shaikh 961129282
 

2007-05-10

The Chairman
Higher Degrees Committee
University of kwaZulu-Natal
King George V Avenue
Glenwood
Durban
kwaZulu-Natal

PhD Thesis in Department of Mechanical Engineering at UKZN : S. Shaikh 961129282
 
Comparison

Comparing the attached journal paper (the Paper) entitled :
Higher-Order Theory of Laminated Composites under Thermal and Static Loading
 
by authors C. Shaikh, V.E. Verijenko, P.Y. Tabakov and S. Adali
 
Second South African Conference on Applied Mechanics (SACAM '98), Cape Town, 2, 13 to 15 January1998, Pp 913-924
to the thesis entitled :
Development of higher-order theories for the analysis of laminated composite structures under static and thermal loading
 
submitted by S. Shaik in November 2002 :

 
Analysis

1.      The Paper is also cited on the University of KwaZulu-Natal website as :
Adali S, Shaikh S, Verijenko V E and Tabakov P Y Higher-order theory of laminated composites under thermal and static loading, Second South African Conference on Applied Mechanics (SACAM '98), Cape Town, 2, 1998, Pp 913-924.
2.      The Paper is a shortened, but otherwise nearly identical version of the journal paper :
Refined Theory of Laminated Anisotropic Shells for the Solution of Thermal Stress Problems
 
by authors V.E. Verijenko, T.R. Tauchert, C. Shaikh, P.Y. Tabakov, submitted 30 January 1998,
3.      Pg 913 Abstract of Paper nearly word-for-word identical to Pg i, Para. 4 of Thesis.

4.      Pg 913 Abstract of Paper nearly word-for-word identical to Pg 130 Para. 4.1 Introduction of Thesis.

5.      P9 913 to 922 (9 A4 pages) of Paper almost word-for-word identical to Pp 132 to Pp 184 of Thesis.

6.      Pg 914 Figure 1. of Paper identical to Figure 2.1 Pg 9 of Thesis.

7.      Pg 923 Summary of Paper nearly identical to Summary Pp 184 to 185 of Thesis.

8.      Pg 924 Figure 2. of Paper identical to Figure 4.9 Pg 83 of Thesis.

9.      The claim made in the Abstract on Page 913 of the Paper is essentially the same and almost identically worded as the claim made on Page 184 in Para. 1 of Chapter 4 Section 4.4 Summary and repeated on Page 191 Para. 2 in Chapter 5 Conclusions of the Thesis, i.e. the main claim.

10.     Pg 923 References Paper identical to same items of Bibliography of Thesis.

11.     V.E. (Victor) Verijenko was at the relevant times a professor of mechanical engineering at the University of Natal and one of the candidate's PhD supervisors.

12.     S. (Sarp) Adali was at the relevant times a professor of mechanical engineering at the University of Natal and one of the candidate's PhD supervisors.


Conclusions

1.      The Paper was published in the Proceedings of the Second South African Conference on Applied Mechanics (SACAM '98), Cape Town, 2, 13 to 15 January 1998, just two weeks before an almost identical paper was submitted to the Journal of Thermal Stresses on 30 January 1998.

2.      Almost the entire Paper has been regurgitated into the Thesis, primarily into Chapter 4 thereof, but also into the Abstract (Page i), Conclusions (Pg 191) and Bibliography (Pp 192 to 201).

3.      This finding is entirely congruent with my initial written opinion dated 28 March 2007 that :
"The overall thesis appears to be more like a concatenation of two or three journal papers authored over a period of time by a group of professional academic researchers in the field of strength of materials and then given to the candidate to wordprocess (and not very well besides) into a self-standing thesis."
4.      It is clear that the Thesis includes material developed by other authors, in this case V.E. Verijenko, P.Y. Tabakov and S. Adali.

5.      The Paper was submitted for publication very nearly five years before the Thesis was submitted for examination.

6.      Although Shaik is identified as the first author of this Paper, he is only the third of four authors of a more comprehensive, but otherwise almost identical journal paper of more-or-less identical vintage.

7.      Chapter 4 of the Thesis is the culmination of the development of the higher-order theory relevant to both mechanical and thermal stresses and the basis for the main claim of the Thesis, i.e. the simultaneous treatment of both mechanical and thermal stresses.

8.      The conclusions of the Thesis are identical, on a word-for-word basis, with those of a journal paper submitted five years previously.

9.      The two of the authors of the Paper are the thesis author's own supervisors who would or should have known that this work was simply regurgitated for the Thesis.

10.     Neither the contribution of the primary author of this Paper, i.e. the candidate, nor the Paper itself, are acknowledged at all in the later and more comprehensive journal paper by essentially the same authors; this would imply that the latter have plagiarised the work of the former.

11.     Simple logic would dictate that it is unlikely that the candidate's supervisors would have plagiarised the work of their student; it is far more likely that this was always the primary work of Professors V.E. Verijenko, T.R. Tauchert and S. Adali, as well as Dr P.Y. Tabakov.

11.     If Shaik had been the primary developer of this theory by the time the Paper was submitted for publishing in January 1998, then there would be absolutely no reason to wait another five years to submit the Thesis.

12      Shaik registered for a PhD degree in 1997 or 1998. By the time the journal paper was submitted in January 1998 it is unlikely that he would have had very little personal expertise in the subject matter.

13.     Beyond any reasonable doubt it can be concluded that this is not the own unaided work of the PhD candidate as attested in his declaration on Page ii of the Thesis.

14.     These conclusions and the particularly poor quality of the presentation of the Thesis are more than sufficient evidence to initiate a full formal enquiry into the award of the PhD degree, including the conduct of both the candidate and his two supervisors.


Richard Young 
PrEng, MSc(Eng), PhD