Smith, N., & Davis, J. L. (2015, June), Connecting Theory and Software: Experience with an Undergraduate Finite Element Course  Paper presented at 2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Seattle, Washington. 10.18260/p.23734

\bibitem{asee_peer_23734}
  Smith, N., \& Davis, J. L. (2015, June), \emph{Connecting Theory and Software: Experience with an Undergraduate Finite Element Course}
  Paper presented at 2015 ASEE Annual Conference \& Exposition, Seattle, Washington.
  10.18260/p.23734

Natasha Smith P.E. and Julian Ly Davis.  "Connecting Theory and Software: Experience with an Undergraduate Finite Element Course".  2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Seattle, Washington, 2015, June.  ASEE Conferences, 2015.  https://peer.asee.org/23734 Internet.  24 Apr, 2024

\bibitem{asee_peer_23734}
  Natasha Smith P.E. and Julian Ly Davis.
  "Connecting Theory and Software: Experience with an Undergraduate Finite Element Course".
  \emph{2015 ASEE Annual Conference \& Exposition, Seattle, Washington, 2015, June}.
  ASEE Conferences, 2015.
  https://peer.asee.org/23734 Internet.  24 Apr, 2024

@INPROCEEDINGS{asee_peer_23734
author = "Natasha Smith P.E. and Julian Ly Davis"
title = "Connecting Theory and Software: Experience with an Undergraduate Finite Element Course"
booktitle = "2015 ASEE Annual Conference \& Exposition"
year = "2015"
month = "June"
address = "Seattle, Washington"
publisher = "ASEE Conferences"
note = {https://peer.asee.org/23734}
number = {10.18260/p.23734}
}

TY  - CPAPER
AB  -                               Connecting Theory and Software:                   Experience with an Undergraduate Finite Element CourseOver the past several years, the commercial finite element software industry has seensignificant growth in both capability and reach. As such, today’s undergraduate students haveaccess to sophisticated, yet easy to use simulation tools. For better or worse, use of the toolsthemselves requires neither an understanding of foundational principles nor a workingknowledge of the finite element method. One could make the case that this is part of thenatural evolution of any new tool (as one no longer needs to be a mechanic to drive a car). Onthe other hand, users absolutely need to know enough to understand the consequences oftheir own modeling choices (e.g. how boundary conditions are applied, element selection,meshes size, etc.).     Thus, the proliferation of FEA software in industry (1) necessitatestreatment of these tools at the undergraduate level and (2) suggests a new balance be struckbetween the software and theory in these courses.This paper details the authors’ experience with a first course in finite element analysis within anundergraduate only engineering curriculum. In particular, the struggle to find a rationalbalance between FEA theory and practical use of software will be discussed. Within the course,students complete a variety of assignments using a mixture of resources to include Matlab byMathworks, Dassault’s SolidWorks, and MSC Patran/Nastran. The course culminates in a self-selected student project requiring they assess the impact of modeling choices on results ofparticular interest.One important finding is the severe limitations of some commercial packages in developing onedimensional models, an important stepping stone to understanding of FEA theory. In addition,the paper studies the impact of prior programming experience on student’s ability to succeed inthe course. Finally, the authors have experimented with a course textbook which emphasizesuse of software and alternatively, a text with more comprehensive treatment of FEMfundamentals.
AU  - Natasha Smith P.E.
AU  - Julian Ly Davis
CY  - Seattle, Washington
DA  - 2015/06/14
PB  - ASEE Conferences
TI  - Connecting Theory and Software: Experience with an Undergraduate Finite Element Course
UR  - https://peer.asee.org/23734
DO  - 10.18260/p.23734
ER  -