Conference Session

Frontiers in Engineering Economy

Collection

2010 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Joseph Hartman, University of Florida; Jennifer Smith, University of Florida

Tagged Divisions

Engineering Economy

process for a given week of lectures (generally consisting of three): 1. Update lecture notes (slides) as deemed required. In this case, the instructor utilizes examples from current media, so the lecture notes (examples) were updated accordingly. 2. Forward notes to technical support team. Slides are “upgraded” with visuals for examples and background for online course “theme”. 3. Notes are returned to instructor for use in traditional class. Any errors (such as a miscalculation caught by students) are fixed and returned to technical team for final processing. (Steps 1-3 are repeated for all three lectures in a week.) 4. Instructor delivers three lectures in studio captured by video and synched with slide

Conference Session

Advances in Engineering Economy Pedagogy

Collection

2010 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Christopher Jablonowski, University of Texas, Austin

Tagged Divisions

Engineering Economy

= an b (1)yn = cost or duration metric of well n, n = order of well in drilling sequence, and a, b = parameters tobe estimated. The parameters a and b can be estimated using non-linear regression. In someapplications, this simple form of learning may be adequate.Brett and Millheim Model. Brett and Millheim propose an alternate learning curve specificationin their influential paper on the subject.3 Their model is attractive because of its simplicity, andfor the intuitive interpretation of the parameters. The Brett and Millheim specification is asfollows:y n = C 1 e (1 − n ) C 2 + C 3 (2)yn = cost or duration metric of well n, n = order of well in drilling sequence, and C’s

Conference Session

Advances in Engineering Economy Pedagogy

Collection

2010 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Emily Evans, University of Arkansas; Heather Nachtmann, University of Arkansas; Kim Needy, University of Arkansas

Tagged Divisions

Engineering Economy

and investigated: 1) the faculty that teach it, 2) the coursecontent and mechanics itself, and 3) the students that take the course. We are currentlyembarking on a follow-up data collection effort to conduct a longitudinal analysis of this priorstudy. This survey paper presents a review of the most relevant literature published since thissurvey. The pedagogy highlighted in this paper includes problems with current teachingmethods, modern technological advances in the engineering economy classroom, and newapproaches to enhance the classroom experience. These findings support our long term goal ofimproving engineering economy pedagogy by increasing visibility, enhancing instructorknowledge, and influencing external stakeholders such as

Conference Session

Advances in Engineering Economy Pedagogy

Collection

2010 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Paul Kauffmann, East Carolina University; Stephanie Sullivan, East Carolina University; Gene Dixon, East Carolina University; B.J. Kim, East Carolina University

Tagged Divisions

Engineering Economy

skillsdeveloped in previous courses. Using this focus, concepts can be mapped from one course to thenext, can be reinforced, and can be developed in a richer and more applied context. The paperaddresses integration of a natural and related group of three topical areas found in manyengineering programs and identified as high priority skills by industry: statistics, engineeringeconomics and project management. Page 15.780.3Curriculum ContextThe basic course plan of the curricular integration implementation rests on the sequence ofcourses described in Figure 1. Although it is not always possible to predict the requirements ofthe capstone project, the

Conference Session

Frontiers in Engineering Economy

Collection

2010 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Ted Eschenbach, TGE Consulting

Tagged Divisions

Engineering Economy

opportunity for an exchange of content, emphases, and approaches thatcan enrich the classrooms of both fields.This paper analyzes the similarities and differences of typical engineering economy and finance(1) texts, (2) students, and (3) faculty. For example, most engineering economy texts will havechapters of detailed coverage with 20-year projects that may have different cash flows in everyyear. In contrast, the typical project in a finance text has a five year life and uniform cash flows.The engineering students are on average better with mathematics, tables of factors, andspreadsheets, but the finance students analyze problems more quickly by using financialcalculators.The textbook authors and classroom teachers in each field have honed their

Conference Session

Frontiers in Engineering Economy

Collection

2010 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Arup Maji, University of New Mexico

Tagged Divisions

Engineering Economy

circle the most appropriate answer.”The response to each question has been tabulated below the question, followed by an analysis ofthe result. Students were also allowed to provide additional comments if they wished to do so.Question #1. Requiring a textbook would have helped you learn better.Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Page 15.443.42 15 26 10Most students 36 (=26+10) thought that a textbook would not have helped them learn better asopposed to 17 (=2+15) students who thought a textbook would have helped.Question #2. Not having a

Conference Session

Including Engineering Economy in All Curricula

Collection

2010 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Leland Blank, Texas A&M University

Tagged Divisions

Engineering Economy

Conference Session

Frontiers in Engineering Economy

Collection

2010 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

Neal Lewis, University of Bridgeport; Ted Eschenbach, TGE Consulting; Joseph Hartman, University of Florida

Tagged Divisions

Engineering Economy

funding. There were two ways that staged funding wasdiscussed: as a part of decision trees, and as independent material. Table 1 shows the results inthose texts where staged funding was discussed, whether there was a discussion of stagedfunding as part of decision tree analysis, and/or whether there was an independent discussion oruse of staged funding.While the use of staged funding is widespread within industry, it is not a significant part of ourengineering economy textbooks. A survey of finance texts revealed much the same thing; somebooks discuss staged funding 1,12,13 while others do not14,15,16,17. Project management texts dealwith the fact that many large projects are managed as distinct stages or phases18,19,20,21, but fewdiscuss how the

Conference Session

Frontiers in Engineering Economy

Collection

2010 Annual Conference & Exposition

Authors

John White, University of Arkansas; Kenneth Case, Oklahoma State University; David Pratt, Oklahoma State University

Tagged Divisions

Engineering Economy

-year period.Before-Tax Analysis with Negligible InflationIn performing before-tax analyses of the payment plans in the absence of inflation, we began byusing a 9% lender’s interest rate, which is the same rate used for the lender in the Grant, Ireson,Leavenworth 8th edition, The cash flows for the four plans, based on a 9% lender’s interest rate,are shown in Table 1. Letting the borrower’s TVOM be 9%, we computed the borrower’s presentworth for lender’s interest rates ranging from 0% to 15%; Figure 1 contains the results.Since the borrower receives $100,000 from the lender and repays the loan over a 10-year period,the borrower prefers the payment plan with the greatest present worth based on the borrower’sTVOM. As expected, when the lender’s