including real-time video processing systemshave compelled the Electronic System Level (ESL) community to switch over from RegisterTransfer Level (RTL) languages such as VHDL and Verilog to higher abstraction levellanguages such as C/C++ in order to reduce the overall design time and improve the productivityof system-level designers. Recent improvements in High Level Synthesis (HLS) tools hasallowed for the development of highly-optimized video processing systems [1-2].Real-time image and video processing applications employ computationally intensive algorithmsthat demand high computational power. High definition images or video frames contain anenormous number of pixels and large number of complex operations is usually performed oneach of these
characterized as global, long term, complex problems c American Society for Engineering Education, 2016 Towards a systems theory-based curriculum for Complex Systems GovernanceThe purpose of this paper is to explore challenges associated with the development of acurriculum for an emerging field of Complex System Governance (CSG) that could be used forinstruction and teaching leaders, managers, and students interested in increasing their knowledge,skills, and abilities about CSG. CSG has been suggested as a means to (1) explore deep systemissues impacting performance, (2) introduce practitioners to new thinking, technologies, tools,and methods to address these issues, and (3
synchronous student interactions. Synchronous student presence and participation - To quantify the synchronous student presence and participation, the number Figure 1. Timeline of synchronous student attendance in the sampled subset of courses (n=24, colored lines) of students who actually synchronously with a fitted linear trend line (black) showing small streamed any portion of the course was recorded but significant net decrease in student attendance for each of the sampled class periods (n=24). over the class period
projects.Systems engineering program assessment includes assessment of student outcomes that mirrorthe ABET a-k outcomes. These outcomes are assessed in the system engineering core courses(see Appendix: Table 1). The achievement of each of the 11 SYEN student outcomes (SOs) is tobe demonstrated by a primary core course and often by one supporting course. The assessment ofeach SO is based on quantitative performance measures that directly assess the SO. Assessmentmethodology is based on the student work, such as assignments, exams, projects, presentations,laboratory experiments, etc. Samples of student work supporting assessment of SOs are retainedand placed in the course binders maintained in the department office.The student outcomes are assessed as per
system engineering content to make it more easily accessible and understandable byundergraduate students.IntroductionA faculty team (professors of professional communication, mechanical engineering, and physics)at Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology have collaboratively designed and taught an intensivemultidisciplinary design program [1] in which undergraduate engineering and science studentstackled one of the National Academy of Engineering’s Grand Challenges[2] during a 12-credit-hour 10-week summer program. The program is centered around designing a system to use in aless developed country with major components of systems engineering integrated throughout theexperience in the form of practice of model-based systems competencies.[3-4] For
system competencies that capstone project students (among other) should learn. Theseinclude: 1. Applying a system stakeholder view of values, trade-offs and optimization of a system. Stated another way, is the system concept, design and operation as it evolves what the stakeholders really want? 2. Defining a project as interconnected subsystems. 3. Understanding a system’s interactions and states (modes). 4. Specifying system technical requirements. 5. Creating and analyzing high-level designs including concept architectures and implementations, and (for example) HW/SW functional trade-offs. 6. Assessing solution feasibility, completeness and consistency. 7. Performing failure mode and risk analyses.Contrasting these
toappreciate the central role of engineering in all facets of modern life. The civil engineering ideasdisseminated by the Structures course are vital to STEM majors and students majoring in thehumanities and social sciences alike, because civil engineers design and build the systems thatgive us shelter (buildings), enable transportation (roads, bridges, ports), and bring us water andpower (dams, reservoirs). In addition to ensuring the content was accessible to all students, thefaculty utilized evidenced-based teaching practices with the aim of enhancing students’ cognitionand affect, as well as addressing retention and overall student satisfaction4.Three research questions guided the evaluation: (1) As reported by the students, to what extentdid the
strategy, leading large teams, and talent development. Nick has led and contributed to many critical projects including saving the mainframe business, taking AIX/Power to the #1 UNIX position, establishing Linux servers in the enterprise market, and was on the team that built the first Bladed architecture for the general purpose x86 market. Nick received a Ph.D. in Electrical and Computer Engineering from University of Massachusetts at Amherst, an M.S. in Computer Engineering from Syracuse University, and a B.S. in Computer Science from the University of Vermont. Nick has been on the advisory boards of many engineering schools including Florida International Uni- versity, North Carolina State University, University
- A Capstone Design Approach Armand J. Chaput (ajchaput@mail.utexas.edu), Senior Lecturer Department of Aerospace Engineering and Engineering Mechanics The University of Texas at Austin1.0 OverviewA hands-on educational approach for teaching undergraduate aircraft design students aboutSystems Engineering (SE) has been developed which we believe is applicable to otherengineering disciplines. The impetus for the initiative is our conclusion that (1) fundamentalunderstanding of the principles of SE and their practical application is important for all engineersand (2) SE can be taught as a principle of design without displacing other course content
engineeringexperience. This paper discusses how the Robotic Mining Competition is used to providestudents with a multidisciplinary, systems engineering learning experience. Specifically, itpresents the general design process used by the University of North Dakota Robotic MiningCompetition Team. The paper also contains a discussion of how the team evolved from year toyear based on their successes and failures.IntroductionAs engineers develop more complex systems there is a need for every engineer to have at least abasic understanding of systems engineering. NASA defines systems engineering as “a robustapproach to the design, creation, and operation of systems.”1 This process involves theestablishment of a set of project objectives, creation of a set of design
grade studentsshould learn that “systems thinking involves considering how every part relates to others,” and“requirements are the parameters placed on the development of a product or system” (p. 39). Some organizations have developed and executed SE-oriented K-12 outreach and educationalprograms.20,23 Despite this interest, few studies have been able to assesses outcomes. Jain etal.24,25 use multiple-choice pre- and post-tests to assess student learning on three levels: 1) SEinformation content, 2) SE applications, and 3) analysis of SE concepts. Results show astatistically significant increase in post-test scores for levels 1 and 2; however, they employ animperfect instrument to measure SE knowledge. Other studies, including Bartus and
problem was solved. Designing and formatting a new product is the complex problem because not all the components of solving the problems is there nor is there one correct solution. Finding the solution is what industries are always trying to do because this unknown area is where companies compete. The first company to solve the problem is the first to reap profit. Model 1 Setting Welldefined Problems Complex Problems Classroom Commonly used to They are rare to find due to the time constraints teach curriculum in the of a class period. The lack of illdefined time constraints. problems in the classroom is the problem. Industrial Used in
and testing the experience environment models, experience building tools thatsupport defining effective learning scenarios, learner interactions and events, and learningassessment tools to measure the efficacy of the experience. The authors describe the capabilitiesof the tools and provide an evaluation of their capabilities based on the update of an existingexperience, the development of new educational experiences, and the application to learningassessment in a class environment.1 introductionSystems engineering and technical leadership (SETL) is a multidisciplinary practice that is asmuch an art as a science. While a traditional model of education can teach the fundamental bodyof knowledge, it is not until this knowledge is put into
ideas rooted inSystems Engineering.The International Council on Systems Engineering (INCOSE)1 defines Systems Engineeringas “an interdisciplinary approach and means to enable the realization of successful systems.”The Systems Engineering Body of Knowledge (SEBoK), created by Body of Knowledge andCurriculum to Advance Systems Engineering (BKCASE) project2, notes that systemsengineering includes the “full life cycle of successful systems, including problemformulation, solution development and operational sustainment and use.” As noted in theSEBoK, a host of criteria such as continuous process improvement, considerations fortradeoffs, system integration, safety, recycling, etc., are needed while developing solutions fortechnical problems. In fact
. Infact, other disciplines such as large-scale systems theory may need to be applied to addressthe management of large data when it comes to real-time control of complex systems.References 1. Guide to the Systems Engineering Body of Knowledge (SEBoK). Retrieved December 31, 2015, from http://sebokwiki.org/wiki/Guide_to_the_Systems_Engineering_Body_of_Knowledge_(SEBoK) 2. Blanchard, B. S., & Fabrycky, W. J. (2010). Systems Engineering and Analysis (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. 3. Banks, J., Carson, J. S. II, Nelson, B. L., & Nicol, D. M. (2009). Discrete-Event System Simulation (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. 4. Buede, D. M., &