futurecurriculum renewal projectsAcknowledgementThis material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No.EEC-0530638. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in thismaterial are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NationalScience Foundation.Bibliography1. Thompson, T., Flick, L, Gummer, E., and Fiez, T. (2004). Enhancing Campus Collaborations Through Design Research in Engineering Education Reform. Proceedings, ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Retrieved from http://www.asee.org/acPapers/code/getPaper.cfm?paperID=7942, 6 December 20052. Fisher, P. D., Fairweather, J. S., and Amey, M. (2001). Systemic Reform in Undergraduate Engineering
. • Develop and apply engineering solutions, while being cognizant of local geography, aspirations and cultures. • Create engineering solutions beyond current or dominant technologies; improve, innovate and invent (technologies) to achieve sustainability. • Actively engage communities and stakeholders in development of engineering solutions.Educational Approach The traditional and probably most common method of introducing aspects of greenengineering has been through a senior and graduate level elective course on environmentalengineering, with an emphasis on process treatment. Courses were developed that focus onmethods to minimize or prevent waste streams from existing chemical plants in the 1990’s. Theeducational
systems, their written comments revealed that they had actually learned manyvaluable lessons about what is needed to adequately instruct another person as well aswhat to expect from real systems and data.Bibliography1 A. Selmer, M. Goodson, M. Kraft, S. Sen, V. F. McNeill, B. Johnston, C. Colton, CEE, Summer, 2005, p. 232.2 J. Henry, R. Zollars, ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Nashville, TN, 2003.3 J. Henry, R. Zollars, ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Salt Lake City, UT, 2004.4 J. Henry, R. Zollars, ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Portland, OR, 2005. Page 11.872.9ChE 441
+ + + + + 330 325 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 Time (s) Figure 6. Temperature vs. Time Experimental Data (+) and Predicted by Equation 4 Multiplied by a Factor of 1.4 (hEXP = 8 W/m2K at TSURFACE = 352 K)Forced Convection Heat Transfer from an Upward Facing Horizontal PlateForced convection heat transfer occurs when the fluid surrounding a surface is set in motion byan external means such as a fan, pump or atmospheric disturbances. This study was concernedwith forced convection heat transfer from a
students, animportant measure to consider in attempts to boost both the retention of capable students and theperformance, satisfaction, and enthusiasm of those who persist.Acknowledgments The authors would like to extend their thanks to Dr. Nicholas Delgass for his cooperationand support in this study, Jason R. Green for his assistance in computerizing survey materials,and the ChE Division reviewers for their useful suggestions. Page 11.1259.10Bibliography1. Seymour, E. and N. Hewitt, Talking about Leaving: Why Undergraduate Leave the Sciences, Westview Press,Boulder, CO, 1997.2. Lent, R. W., S. D. Brown, J. Schmidt, B. Brenner, H. Lyons and
method as their preferred technique. They typically estimate the uncertainty in theircount to be +/- 0.5 beats. In addition, students practice their timing technique and estimate theuncertainty of timing due to their response time using the stop watch. This is done using astopwatch to time ten second intervals displayed on an online timing device. With practice,students could typically measure within +/- 0.15 s of the “true” time. An insightful studentrecognizes that the timing device can give a misleading impression of accuracy -- limitations intiming technique introduce a significant uncertainty that exceeds both the published 0.01%accuracy of the device and the ILE of +/- 0.01 s.Students obtain the pulse rate first by measuring the time for
butalso for the team to let the judges know when to start timing. 2006 TULSA ENGINEERING CHALLENGE DESIGN DOCUMENTATION CHEMICAL SWITCH COMPETITION PLEASE TYPE OR PRINT CLEARLY AND LEGIBLY Name of school: ___________________________________________________________ School address, city, zip: ____________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________________ Sponsoring teacher: _________________________________________________________ Phone number: _____________________________________________________________ Name(s) of entrant(s): (1
Automotive and Armaments Command (TACOM). • Michigan Economic Development Corporation. • United States Department of Education Graduate Assistantships in Areas of National Need grant numbers P200A010413 and P200A030192. • United States Department of Energy contract number DE-FG02-04ER63821 • Army Research Laboratory cooperative agreement W911NF-05-2-0048 • National Science Foundation grant number DMI-0456537Bibliography. 1. D. Stone, S. Sorby, M. Plichta, and M. Raber, “The Enterprise Program at Michigan Technological University,” International Journal of Engineering Education (2003). 2. M. Plichta, M. Raber, “The Enterprise Program at Michigan Tech University: Results and Assessment to Date,” ASEE
providing objective analysisand effective solutions that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors aroundthe world,” issued a report in the 1970’s expressing the same concern. Clearly, the chemical industry was aware of the potential impact of terror on plant safetyfor several decades. The next question to be addressed is whether the industry has in placepractices and policies which effectively address the threat. The thesis was proposed that chemicalplants in the United States already follow policies which would minimize the impact of anyattack, and those procedures are a result of environmental concerns; previous accidents; previouslaws and regulations; and inherently safe design principles.18 These assertions were
actually practicing controlengineering in chemical process systems. These sources confirmed the comments we hadreceived. All sources, however, indicated that there are several aspects of processcontrol that graduates do need to know and that these areas were not being covered bycurrent course work.Based on inputs that the course content provided few useful skills to our students, seriousconsideration s given to dropping the process control course from the requiredcurriculum. Dropping this course would eliminate the wasted time and energy studentsspent in a nonproductive pursuit and allow inclusion of new courses in the requiredcurriculum. An alternate proposal involved creating a new course that met the needs ofstudents by including those skills
elective(s) in unit operations could be Table 1: Suggested Traditional Chemical Engineering Curriculum Required Subjects Basic Sciences basic skills/freshman class math material and energy balances chemistry thermodynamics physics fluid mechanics biology heat transfer mass transfer/separations Possible Electives transport phenomena§ safety reaction engineering biochemical engineering control materials/polymers unit operations laboratory class(es
Aluminum channelBoard of Education End of metal rod Rubber bandBattery pack (servo power) Sump Pressure Transducer Page 11.1320.10 2.0 Volumetric flow rate, Q / mL s-1 Figure 2. Flow data Data obtained with a fully opened valve 1.5 l linear fit
. Each group wasallowed five minutes to present their report which included question and answer sessions. In the first group, the two male members monopolized the presentation with the threefemale members only participating during the question and answer portion. The initial groupalso provided no introductions of group members nor motivation(s) for the experimental work.Prior to the beginning of second presentation, the instructors gave immediate feedback onpresentation strategy and reminded the students about the required equal participation from allgroup members. This method of immediate comments to influence the presentation behavior ofeach group was followed for all presentations and the expected improvements in
., Johnson, R.T. "Pedagogies of engagement: Classroom-basedpractices" J. Engr. Ed. 94 (1) 87-101 (2005).2 Minerick, A.R. and Schultz, K.H. "Freshman Chemical Engineering Experiment: Charged Up on Electrophoresisand Brewing with Bioreactors" ASEE annual conference, Portland, OR June 12 - 15, 2005.3 Farrell, S., R.P. Hesketh, J.A. Newell, and C.S. Slater, "Introducing Freshman to Reverse Process Engineering &Design Through Investigation of the Brewing Process," Int. J. Engr. Educ. 17(3), 588-592, 2001.4 Wang, E. "Teaching Freshmen Design, Creativity and Programming with Legos and Labview", IEEE Frontiers inEducation, pp. F3G-11-15, 2001.5 Solen, K. A., and J. N. Harb, Introduction to Chemical Process Fundamentals & Design, 4th Edition, McGraw
followingeducational objectives: 1. Design experiments to optimize the performance of a CVD reactor. o Identify key reactor inputs and determine relationship between input levels and achieved thin film uniformity. Select Select the Choose an response/ independent appropriate dependent variables/ experimental variable(s) factors design Draw Analyze the Perform the conclusions/ data using experiment inferences appropriate (collect data