AC 2011-2301: UNIT OPERATIONS LAB BAZAAR: ASSESSMENT OFMINIATURE INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENTLaura Coon, Washington State University A recent graduate of WSU, Laura aspires to find learning and understanding in everything she does. Born and raised in Seattle, WA Laura is 22 and loving every minute of life as a chemical engineer. During her education at WSU she worked under Dr. Bernard Van Wie in heat transfer and fluid flow education research, specifically assessing the desktop learning module double pipe and shell and tube cartridges.Mr. Paul B Golter, Washington State University Paul B. Golter obtained an MS from Washington State University and recently defended his PhD degree and is currently the Laboratory Supervisor in
of partial differential equations(PDEs). In this paper, the methods for introducing sophomore-level students to PDEs and theircomputer-aided solution are described with respect to learning objectives and a detailed exampleof a student exercise. The impact of the instruction is presented in the context of student pre- andpost-instruction self-evaluation, and performance on junior-level laboratory work that involvesthe analysis of a transient system.KeywordsPartial differential equations, numeric methods, chemical engineering transport.1. IntroductionIndividual and combined transport courses make up the instructional core of most ChemicalEngineering B.S. programs in the United States today1-3, a pedagogical focus within thediscipline that
feedback role via an industrial advisory board.Quantity of CoverageOf the seventy institutions responding to the question, 68 indicated they offered at least onecourse identified as containing significant “process control”. Seven had more than one requiredcourse on the topic, and two reported coverage in electives in addition to a required course. Twoinstitutions indicated no coverage in a required course but that the topic was covered in electives.Institutions reported an average of 40 hours lecture, 10.8 hours simulation or problem laboratory,and 7.1 hours of experimental laboratory per course. When the subject was integrated into othercourses, the coverage was an average 18.8 hours lecture.Course DeliverablesFigure 2 shows the distribution of
applications in separation pro- cesses and the design of advanced composite materials. About engineering educational research, Vasquez is working on the analysis of assessment methods to improve teamwork, open-ended laboratory experi- ments, active learning, and implementing computational tools to understand chemical engineering con- cepts. Vasquez has a vast experience teaching the Unit Operation Laboratories for six years and has taught many other junior-level chemical engineering courses.Dr. Michael J. Elsass, University of Dayton Michael Elsass is the Director of the Chemical Engineering Department at the University of Dayton. He received his B.Ch.E in chemical engineering from the University of Dayton and his M.S. and
engineering programs across the U.S. declined 34% between1997 and 20061 and The University of Tulsa (TU) has mirrored this trend. This same period oftime saw significant changes in the technology infrastructure at TU in the College of Engineeringand Natural Sciences. Every classroom was equipped with a computer console and display forinstruction. All engineering departments established computer laboratories for their students inaddition to the numerous facilities available to all students. WiFi was installed campus-wide.Two instructional laboratories were created with computers for 20 or 30 students.In 2007 and 2008, the public watched the price for a barrel of oil rise to unprecedented levels.Salaries for engineers prepared to work in the petroleum
using soft lithographic techniques11 and the AnalyticalInstrumentation Laboratory capable of fluorescence microscopy and image processing formicrofluidics applications through the collaboration with another ChE faculty, Professor SergioMendez. The cleanroom and laboratory are fully functional since Summer 2010, and we havepresented some preliminary results from these facilities at the 2010 AIChE Annual Meeting12.In the first course, the fundamentals of microfabrication techniques, chip design andmicrofluidics will be introduced in both class lectures and related readings. In the lab sessions,students will actually go to our research laboratory to design and fabricate microfluidic chipsusing soft lithography and perform simple experiments on
chemicalengineering majors. The course is also open to juniors and other engineering / sciencemajors when space is available. It is a four-credit course, meeting twice weekly for twohours. This block schedule was adopted in order to allow flexibility in the use of classtime, as described below. It is a “permission” course, having no formal pre- or co-requisites listed, although the course relies on students’ coursework in mass and energybalances, heat transfer, thermodynamics, and chemistry to a significant extent.We wanted to have a food-safe laboratory available as part of this course so that studentscould not only prepare and assess food products, but also taste what they had made. Westrongly suggest that anyone wishing to bring this course to their
levels of Bloom’sTaxonomy. The semester ended with a final exam, with questions at the higher levels of Bloom’sTaxonomy.Project DescriptionsThe students are simultaneously enrolled in a laboratory course, where the experiments requiremultiple operators and two or three hours to collect data under different initial conditions. Theseprojects were not meant to replace the lab. They were developed to allow students additionalopportunities to see how things work, and to encourage them to observe engineering principles ineveryday activities. The learning objectives for the projects were also different from thelaboratory experiment objectives. Details of the projects and their learning objectives will bedescribed when the project is complete. Data for
Technology and Its Applications, along withcorresponding hands-on lab sessions. In the first course, the fundamentals of microfluidics, chipdesign, and microfabrication techniques are introduced in both class lectures and relatedreadings. In the lab sessions, students will actually go to our research laboratory to design andfabricate microfluidic chips using soft lithography. In the second course, the applications ofmicrofluidics technology, e.g., in chemistry, engineering, and biotechnology, are introducedthrough class lectures and journal paper readings. In the lab session, students will performexperiments on their microfluidic chips, such as DNA electrophoresis, mixing, organic synthesis,and fuel cell reactions, to get familiar with fluid
review of the possible benefitsderived from the literature. Student responses to the research experiences were largely positive;91% of students indicated that they experienced gains from completing the research experience 4.They also identified a number of benefits to students, including personal and professional gains,gains in communications skills, gains in various research skills (e.g., laboratory/field skills, workorganization skills, etc.), clarification or confirmation of educational and career plans and goals,and improved career or graduate school preparation 4. These identified benefits aligned largely Page 26.1243.3with those
influenced them to major in engineering. Almostuniformly the conclusion was that it was an influential teacher (usually in math or science) thatgot them started. While the influence of this teacher led to an interest in science how thisultimately resulted in majoring in engineering was never as clear cut. To eliminate thisuncertainty we sought to bring math or science teachers to the WSU campus for a summer towork along side engineers in their research laboratories to get a clear idea of what engineers do.The teachers, in addition to strengthening their math and science backgrounds, then would serveas spokespersons for engineering in their respective classrooms. During the five years that theearlier program was in operation a total of 67 teachers
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
Paper ID #11972Improving Student Technical Communication via Self ReflectionMr. Kenneth P Mineart, North Carolina State University Kenneth Mineart received his Bachelor’s degree in Chemical & Biochemical Engineering from the Uni- versity of Iowa. Currently, he is a doctoral student in Chemical & Biomolecular Engineering at North Carolina State University where he works in the field of block copolymer science with Professor Richard Spontak. Kenneth has regularly served as a graduate teaching assistant for a variety of courses including: Unit Operations Laboratory, Material and Energy Balances, Introduction to
a continuous flow reactor. The feed stream contains A and Bwith CA0=CB0= 2M and it is fed with a volumetric flow rate of 5 dm3/min. If a 50% conversion from thelimiting reactant is desired, determine the molar flow of each component at the reactor effluent. Figure 1. Example of a story problem for IQ-407 course. Adapted from Fogler1.Kinetics is the second pillar of chemical engineering. As mentioned before, rate laws have to bedetermined from experimental data, so laboratory work was used to support this topic learning.Three different methods for obtaining kinetics parameters (reaction order, reaction specific rateand temperature dependence) from experimental data were discussed at classroom. Then,students developed
Engineering Analysis (a three-credit hour studio offered each spring) , our freshmen,in a class size of 80-100, are engaged in a seamless, two-semester problem-based learningexperience.Course structure to accommodate PBLThrough a series of “Team Challenges” (i.e. design projects and experimentation) our freshmancohort engages in activities focused on fundamental STEM concepts and applications to helpthem better visualize and understand the path they have started on to enter engineering practice.Figure 1 illustrates the range of topics covered in Learning Outcomes established for the firstyear experience. To enable sufficient time obviously needed to cover such a broad range oftopics, the Analysis course comprises one credit hour of laboratory and two
University in St. Louis. She earned her Ph.D. in Chemical Engineering from Purdue University in 2015. Her research focuses on implementation of process safety material in the chemical engineering curricu- lum, effective laboratory instruction, and active learning in core chemical engineering courses.Dr. David L. Silverstein P.E., University of Kentucky David L. Silverstein is a Professor of Chemical Engineering at the University of Kentucky. He is also the Director of the College of Engineering’s Extended Campus Programs in Paducah, Kentucky, where he has taught for 22 years. His PhD and MS studies in ChE were completed at Vanderbilt University, and his BSChE at the University of Alabama. Silverstein’s research interests
institutions responding to the question, fifty (79.3%) indicated they offered asingle course in MEB. Twelve offered two courses, and one had three courses, though one ofthose courses was a general engineering course with related content. Of those institutionsoffering two or more courses, 3 were on the quarter system. Overall, institutions reported 4.7h/wk total devoted to the course, broken up into an average 3.2 h/wk on lecture, 1.3 h on problemsolving, and 0.2 h/wk on experimental laboratory.In 1990, 74% of responding programs offered one course in MEB, with the remainder offeringtwo courses. Laboratory courses were significantly more common, with 48 departments havingdedicated laboratory time averaging 1.92 h/wk. The 1999 survey indicates that 81
the School of ElectricalEngineering and Computer Science an experimental learning laboratory exists.Contained in this laboratory are two rooms separated by a two way mirror. In one of thetwo rooms there is a Smartboard system. This works like a whiteboard but also recordseverything that students in the room write on its surface (in addition to many otheroptions). From the second room observers may watch the students in the first room aswell as record all of their actions (both audio and visual), comment of these actions, andcommunicate with the students when necessary. To probe for possible reasons why students might struggle with the work in thematerial and energy balance course we asked for four volunteer two-person teams fromthe
laboratories and reactor design. His current research activities include engineering educational reform, enzyme-based catalytic reactions in micro-scale reactor systems, and bioengineering applied to renewable fuels and chemicals.Rebecca Toghiani, Mississippi State University Dr. Rebecca K. Toghiani is an Associate Professor of Chemical Engineering at MSU. She received the 1996 Dow Outstanding New Faculty Award and the 2005 Outstanding Teaching Award from the ASEE Southeastern Section. A Grisham Master Teacher at MSU, she is an inaugural member of the Bagley College of Engineering Academy of Distinguished Teachers. She has also been recognized at MSU with the 2001 Outstanding Faculty
effective for a time;however, they did not address changes in technology or on-line resources that have more recentlybecome available and widely used. Moreover, the scenario-based videos were limited in scope toa single course in a single engineering discipline which restricted their overall utility across thecurriculum. Recent observations by the authors and input from current undergraduate studentsidentified new scenarios that needed to be addressed, including cheating in laboratory courses,cheating in project-based courses, and cheating on exams. Student Conduct professionals furtheroffered suggestions on the commentary provided by the video’s narrator to establish context forthe scenarios. This work in progress presents the updated set of
participants indicated their initial impres-at 75.1 gallons. Over 70% of student water conservation sions of chemical engineering involved excessive work inefforts involved reducing the amount of time showering, which experimental laboratories, and were not aware of the subjectsaccounted for an average of 50.4% of their daily water use environmental applications. A number of responses indicatedwithout conservation. Water use from showering also showed that reservoir design was a task students did not associate withFig. 3. Common student activities that required use of water, and theiraverage daily use both with and without water consumption. All units are inUS Gallons
a CHE-ME elective entitled, “Interdisciplinary Studies inCeramic Materials Processing,” and a CHE-ECE-ME elective entitled, “Introduction toMicroelectromechanical Systems (MEMS). Designed with more than one pedagogical focus,these courses were implemented not only to provide real interdisciplinary team-based activities,but also to be true design experiences with either laboratory and computational experiences orboth. Over the past ten years, this pair of courses have been test-beds for examining theeffectiveness of various team selection strategies, the integration of inquiry-based learning, andeven the introduction of a novel inter university collaboration on entrepreneurship. These twoexperiments in interdisciplinary instruction provided
category consists of a classroom/laboratory experiencewhere high school students are exposed to engineering with the expectation that these studentswill then be more likely to enroll in engineering. Typical examples are the “InspiresCurriculum”,9 “Engineering Concepts Curriculum Project”,10 the “Academy IntroductionMission”,11 and the “Texas Pre-Freshman Engineering Program”12. A program to address these issues was started in this department in 1993 with fundingfrom the National Science Foundation. The concept for this activity arose from a conversationamongst chemical engineering faculty members on what influenced them to major in engineering.Almost uniformly the conclusion was that it was an influential teacher at the 5th through 9th
technical content outcomes. Figure 8 shows the distribution ofthese assessments. ABET evaluation criteria covered within thermodynamics included a rangeof topics, including evaluation of information, environmental / political / scientific policies,writing and communications, and safety. In addition, 19 institutions focus solely on technicalcontent within their course(s).Figure 8: ABET outcomes assessed through chemical engineering thermodynamics.Process and SettingUnsurprisingly, all thermodynamics courses report using class / lecture time (Figure 9).Laboratories were only reported for two programs, explaining the small number of lab reportsseen in Figure 10.Figure 9: Types of instructional settings used by thermodynamics coursesIn terms of
approximately 12% of the classes met weekly for a separate laboratory (notcomputational) activity or recitation. 74% of the classes only met for lecture, while the rest ofthe classes met additionally for a recitation or computation laboratory.The primary system of units used was a combination of SI and English units (58%). For theremaining courses, only SI units were used (42%). No class used only English units. Theseresults are in contrast to the units of measure used in 1977. In 1977, mixed units were used in68% of the courses, SI units were used in 5% of the courses, and English units were used in 27%of the courses. Thus from 1977 to 2014, there has been a dramatic shift to move away fromEnglish-only units of measure for fluid mechanics
, and also Educational Innovation to virtual graduate students at Tecnol´ogico de Monterrey. She has experience working in projects with different local industries. Recently she has been working with innovation and technology for engineering education (remote Laboratories, virtual laboratories, flipped classroom, active learning and PBL among others).Dr. Pablo Moreno Ram´ırez, Universidad Aut´onoma Chapingo Born in Chile in 1942. Get graduation as Agronomist at the Univrsidad de Chile in 1966. In 1969 went to Cornell University to study Agricutural Economics. Get Master degree in 1972 and started Ph.D program at the same university, In 1974 went to M´exico to be professor at Universidad Aut´onoma Chapingo where I get
conversion of the fuel into protons and electrons. Theprotons pass through a sulfonated polymer electrolyte membrane. Meanwhile, theelectrons are conducted back through the gas diffusion layer, bipolar plate, and electricload where they react with the protons and oxygen to form water. For more informationregarding fuel cell construction, the reader is referred to the text of Larminie and Dicks1or the Los Alamos National Laboratory fuel cell website2.Bringing Fuel Cell Concepts into Engineering CurriculaIn this section we will briefly review our efforts in bringing fuel cell technology into theundergraduate and graduate chemical engineering curriculum.At Michigan Tech, fuel cell concepts have been incorporated in several ways: • Alternative
PlusDynamic Process Simulation and Basic ControlsThis part of the study was conducted by a University of Houston master thesis student in theprocess automation laboratory of the University of Houston – Downtown in partial fulfillment ofthe master thesis requirements at the University of Houston.Using the steady state design mentioned in the previous section, a rigorous dynamic processsimulation was developed using Aspen Dynamics. The use of Aspen Engineering tools todynamically predict process behavior and evaluate control structures is not yet widespread inacademia even though such tools (at least the steady state ones) are extensively used by theprocessing industries. It was decided to use such tools because of the rigor of the resultsproduced and
AC 2008-1024: KIDS BIRTHDAY PARTIES: “HAVING FUN AND LEARNINGENGINEERING”Gerardine Botte, Ohio University Gerardine G. Botte: Dr. Botte is an Associate Professor at the Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering Department at Ohio University and the Director of the Electrochemical Engineering Research Laboratory (EERL) at Ohio. She received her B.S. from Universidad de Carabobo (Venezuela), and her M.E. and Ph.D. from University of South Carolina. She worked for three years as a Process Engineering in a Petrochemical Complex (PEQUIVEN, filial of PDVSA. Venezuela) before going to graduate school. Dr. Botte applies chemical engineering principles for the analysis of electrochemical systems. She has
energy. This energy will then be transferred to the greenhouse enclosure atnight. A moveable thermal blanket will be drawn over the top and down the sides of thegreenhouse on cold nights to further preserve heat.A geothermal closed loop ground coil heating system will be furnished for supplementaryheating with radiant hot water as required. This system will basically transfer heat from theground and discharges it into the greenhouse in the cold weather. It is 50% more efficient than astandard gas fired heater. The yearly electricity requirement for geothermal system will be offsetwith the electricity provided by a 7.5 KW solar voltaic system installed on the south facing roofof the adjacent laboratory building.Monthly heat loss charts have been