AC 2010-1048: INTRODUCTION TO MECHANICAL ENGINEERING - AHANDS-ON APPROACHGarrett Clayton, Villanova University Dr. Garrett M. Clayton recieved his BSME from Seattle University and his MSME and PhD in Mechanical Engineering from the University of Washington (Seattle). He is an Assitant Professor in Mechanical Engineering at Villanova University. His research interests focus on mechatronics, specifically modeling and control of scanning probe microscopes and unmanned vehicles.James O'Brien, Villanova University Professor Jim O’Brien, a tenured Faculty member in the Mechanical Engineering Department of Villanova University, has graduate degrees from Villanova University and Temple University. At
below)revealed some interesting results. In the entry surveys, all five participants had scattered answersfor questions 1 and 2 and “Yes” on question 3. At the end of the outreach program all thestudents answered “Very Well” on the first and “Yes” on the second and third questions. Thisalso shows the impact of the outreach program on the students’ self-confidence and motivation.Table 3. S-STEM Survey “About Yourself” Questions [8]ImpactThe authors have combined the NRC strategies with the California Life Sciences Institute callsfor authentic collaborative cross-disciplinary experiences by integrating research-based high-impact practices into an outreach workshop on Increasing Diversity in Engineering And Labor(IDEAL) force, involving middle and
impactsummative assessment later in the course1. Competency integrated standards of achievementprovide guidelines for improvement including strengths and weaknesses of the course, contentchanges, methods of content delivery, and assessment8.Competency is defined as having the ability to do a set task(s) focusing on the application ofknowledge and not only on the acquisition of knowledge or skills8,9. Using competency basedstandards, the strengths and weakness of a course could be effectively determined8. One methodis to define a competency based curriculum, where students have to achieve a minimum level ofknowledge in their studies to graduate. These competencies provide a set of guidelines for studentsto move closer to their educational goals. These
Paper ID #18975Learning Experience in Designing a Dome Test Setup for Sheet Metal Forma-bility CharacterizationMonica Dore Monica Dor´e currently holds an engineering position at the National Aeronautics and Space Adminis- tration (NASA) at Wallops Flight Facility as an Aerospace engineer. Ms. Dore has received an Un- dergraduate Degree with Honors in Engineering with a Mechanical Specialization from the University of Maryland Eastern Shore (UMES) in December 2014. Prior to receiving her undergraduate degree she worked as an intern with NASA from 2012-2014. She works supporting Airborne Science missions aboard flight
Paper ID #16053Promote Students’ Understanding of Engineering Dynamics: A True/FalseReasoning PracticeDr. Shaobo Huang, South Dakota School of Mines and Technology Dr. Shaobo Huang is an Assistant Professor and the Stensaas Endowed STEM Chair in the Department of Mechanical Engineering at South Dakota School of Mines & Technology. Her research interests in- clude student retention and academic performance in engineering, student achievement evaluation and assessment, and K-12 STEM curriculum design.Dr. John M. Mativo, University of Georgia Dr. John Mativo is Associate Professor at the University of Georgia
Effectiveness, she worked as the Education Project Manager for the NSF-funded JTFD Engineering faculty development program, as a high school math and science teacher, and as an Assistant Principal and Instructional & Curriculum Coach.Lydia Ross, Arizona State University Lydia Ross is a doctoral candidate and graduate research assistant at Arizona State University. Her re- search interests focus on higher education equity and access, particularly within STEM.Dr. Casey Jane Ankeny, Northwestern University Casey J. Ankeny, PhD is an Assistant Professor of Instruction at Northwestern University. Casey received her bachelor’s degree in Biomedical Engineering from the University of Virginia in 2006 and her doctorate degree in
completing this course were more confidentin their ability to manufacture the components they needed in the future course and moreinterested in general engineering principles and concepts.REFERENCES[1] Froyd JE. Integrated engineering curricula. Journal of engineering education (Washington, D.C.).2005;94(1):147.[2] Al-Holou N, Bilgutay NM, Corleto C, Demel JT, Felder R, Frair K, et al. In: First-year integratedcurricula across engineering education coalitions. Fie; IEEE; 1998. p. 177-97.[3] Briller V, Hanesian D, Perna AJ. In: An assessment study on replacing the engineering graphicscourse with the conference and exposition; June 24-27, 2001; Albuquerque, New Mexico. ASEE; 2001. [4] Olds BM. The effect of a first-year integrated engineering
Paper ID #6665Outcome, Economic and Operational Benefits of Hybrid Courses - A PublicResearch University PerspectiveDr. David J. Dimas, The University of California, Irvine Dr. Dimas has over 25 years of experience which centers on consulting in simulation and design and developing and teaching a curriculum of related engineering analysis and product development courses in both commercial and academic settings. He served in a number of top-level management positions at both PDA Engineering and MSC Software including director of training services, customer support, educational sales and product documentation in the
overwhelming for students.Sources of student confusion regarding units are manifold. The variety of emphasis placed onunits conversions and cancellations across the curriculum can lead students to believe that unitsdifficulties are subject-specific, leading to a “units anxiety” that occurs fresh with every class.The emphasis can range from a consistent methodical treatment of units in class examples to atotal absence of numerical computations. (The author took an undergraduate heat transfer classin which students needed to rely on classroom lectures because there was no assigned text. Theinstructor presented all material by deriving governing relationships in a purely symbolicfashion. Not a single example, homework problem, or exam problem contained a
dischargemachining, etc) and CNC systems were introduced. During the last 20 minutes, the class went tothe materials lab and watched a demonstration of material testing.2.4. Computer-aided engineeringIn the area of computer-aided engineering, the curriculum has one freshmen-level requiredcourse, Engineering Graphics (Mech 103), one junior-level required course, EngineeringAnalysis (Mech 313), and one senior-level elective course, Computer-aided Engineering (Mech485). The elective course Mech 485 is also one of the three option courses offered in the designand manufacturing concentration area in the curriculum.The lecture started with an introduction to Computer-aided Design as a way of replacing thetraditional inefficient method of mechanical drafting
system simulation to demonstrate that the system will perform as required. A formal report is required, but the narrative may be integrated into a MathCADdocument. Drawings of the system are required. The final document must also contain aletter of transmittal; a one-page executive summary summarizing the design method, theresults, and the final cost of the system; the narrative; a bibliography; appendices of allmanufacturer information. The executive summary should be written for a manager or someone with abusiness degree. The body (narrative) should fully document each step in the designprocess and be written for an engineer who may not be an expert in heat exchangerdesign, piping system design, or pump design and
world news. More specifically, if contemporary issues pertain to thediscipline of engineering, students will do little to maintain their knowledge apart from what isdiscussed in the classroom context. In reality, this topic must be more intentionally interjectedinto the curriculum to show application of engineering principles.Two categories of courses come to mind that should adequately support “soft” outcomes. Onesuch course would be a senior capstone design course. Berg and Nasr discuss such a course.1 Itis true that the capstone design course should be the pinnacle of an engineering program, wherestudents are able to integrate all aspects of their education into a challenging project. It is anatural place to discuss topics in the
discussed by faculty for manyyears on how to improve in this area. Over 15 years ago, ME students were required to take aclass in engineering economics, yet it was dropped because of numerous constraints on theprogram when all students at UTSA were required to take an economics course offered by theeconomics department as part of the Core curriculum requirement. In addition, the State ofTexas Legislature has encouraged all programs to limit the number of semester credit hoursneeded to earn a Bachelor’s Degree to 120 semester credit hours. The Bachelor of Science inMechanical Engineering at UTSA is currently 128 semester credit hours and this was approvedonly after the department provided additional justification to exceed the 120 goal. Because
faculty member in the School of Mechanical Engineering at Georgia Tech, where he now serves as the Associate Chair for Undergraduate Studies. His research areas are in the fields of dynamics, controls, vibrations, and acoustics. He is also active in course and curriculum development. He is a Fellow of the ASME.Dr. Karen M. Feigh, Georgia Tech Karen M. Feigh is an associate professor in the School of Aerospace Engineering at the Georgia Institute of Technology. Her research interests include cognitive engineering, design of decision support systems, human-automation interaction, and behavioral modeling. She teaches courses at both the undergraduate and graduate level on topics including flight dynamics, cognitive
real-world problems are integrated and leveraged as a vehicle to tap into students’ priorknowledge that enhances scholarship aptitudes and elucidates the usefulness of engineeringprinciples in design applications. Such pedagogical technique has been extensively implementedfor professional training in medicine and related health professions, but given its educationalversatility, various engineering educators have embraced it as an alternative solution towardsalleviating instructional quandaries [1]. Despite its potential to positively impact student learningand transform the learning environment, its utilization is not frequent amongst most engineeringeducators. The literature reports only a small number of engineering programs such as
continuing the experiential learning pilot programs withcontinual improvement efforts and additional data gathering/analysis. Improvement efforts referspecifically to refining existing activities as well as developing new ones. One example of suchan activity under development is shown in Figure 7. This involves characterizing the powerconsumption and cooling capacity of a small thermoelectric cooler which students can thenperform an energy balance on to determine its thermodynamic efficiency. As an addinglearning/integrated curriculum aspect, the temperature measurements associated with this projectare performed via an Arduino-controlled thermocouple amplifier (MAX31855) which can beused for either single or differential thermocouple operation
University Matthew Ford received his bachelor’s degree in mechanical engineering and materials science from the University of California, Berkeley, and went on to complete his Ph.D. in mechanical engineering at North- western University. After completing an internship in quantitative methods for education research with the Center for the Integration of Research, Teaching, and Learning (CIRTL), he joined the Cornell Active Learning Initiative as a postdoctoral associate. His teaching interests include solid mechanics, engineering design, and inquiry-guided learning.Dr. Hadas Ritz, Cornell University Hadas Ritz is a senior lecturer in Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, and a Faculty Teaching Fellow at the James
seen from Table 5, the students agreed that this design course helped them toachieve 7 out of the 11 ABET outcomes (with an overall score above 4 out of 5). Compared withthe results collected in Fall 2017, it can be found that the Fall 2018 class has made progress indeveloping 9 out of the 11 ABET student outcomes (a, c, e, f, g, h, i, j, and k). From the rightmostcolumn in Table 6 we can find that the three ABET mostly impacted by the presented activitiesare outcomes h, i, and a. The effects of the new course materials, including the newly designedviscous damping system projects and the integration of other vibration and control systems builtby previous students, in enhancing the teaching effectiveness and student learning experience inthis
Paper ID #10002Challenges and Evolution of Combined and Separate Thermodynamics Coursesin a Mechanical Engineering and Mechanical Engineering Technology Pro-gramProf. Martin William Weiser, Eastern Washington University Martin Weiser is an Assistant Professor in the Engineering and Design Department at Eastern Washington University. He earned his BS in Ceramic Engineering from the Ohio State University and his MS and PhD in Materials Science and Mineral Engineering from the University of California at Berkeley. He then joined the Mechanical Engineering department at the University of New Mexico where he taught Materials
tosuccessful pedagogue and curriculum design to meet the goals of the engineer of 2020. Thisstudy examines the correlation between four factors, visuospatial ability, conceptualunderstanding, prior knowledge, and student course performance as measured by prerequisitecourse grades, course grade, and conceptual knowledge gain. Statistical correlation andhierarchical analysis were applied to the results of the Paper Folding Test (PFT), Card RotationsTest (CRT), pre- and post-Statics Concept Inventory (SCI) tests, admission test scores, andprerequisite course grades to examine these relationships.Although many factors influence student success in an Introduction to Engineering Staticscourse, their understanding of underlying concepts, knowledge from
the previous ASEE World Congress we presented an overview of our 3-phase multi subjectdidactical method as an integrative part of our degree program Vehicle Engineering1,2. Our workhas shown that the first part of the 3-phase method helps sophomores learn to workautonomously, but also to be able to work in teams, and to present engineering results clearly andimpressively.The second phase of the multi subject PBL starts in the third academic year and encompasses thefifth and sixth semesters. A set of project topics is defined, based on different specializedtechnical subjects, with an emphasis on the development of real products. One of the mostimportant projects is the design, assembly and testing of a real racing car. To cope with theproject
introduce computer algebra and symbolic manipulation software intothe early undergraduate mechanical engineering curriculum. This paper discusses onecomponent of the exploratory project that focuses specifically on how the timing of introducingMathCAD affects student attitudes and performance in a sophomore-level numerical methodscourse at the University of South Carolina. An experiment was conducted in the Fall semester of2006 with a class of sixty students. The class was divided into two groups that receiveddifferentiated instruction at four times during the semester. The experimental group completed acomputer assignment before going to lecture; the control group heard the lecture and thencompleted the computer assignment. Qualitative data was
level for “research-based learning” which is inherent inthe graduate level but almost non-existent in the undergraduate level. To achieve this research-based learning at the undergraduate level, a new educationalparadigm is needed that, demands a commitment to the intellectual growth of individualstudents, redefines the role of engineering in society, and stimulates students to pursue careers inengineering and research. These goals can be accomplished by integrating research intoengineering education, serving to increase recruitment and retention and enabling futureengineers to become society leaders. To pursue these goals, we initiated an effort to translate state-of-the-art multidisciplinaryresearch examples and accomplishments
Paper ID #33503Incorporating a Mid-semester Project to Evaluate Communication, andLeadership Skills for Undergraduate Engineering Students in theStatics/Strength of Materials Course: A Comparative Assessment Beforeand During COVID-19Dr. Eleazar Marquez, Rice University Eleazar Marquez is an Assistant Teaching Professor in the Department of Mechanical Engineering at Rice University.Dr. Samuel Garcia Jr., NASA EPDC Dr. Samuel Garc´ıa Jr. is an Education Specialist at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center. Dr. Garc´ıa helps fa- cilitate professional development to both formal and informal STEM educators utilizing NASA resources with a
. The breakdown of the curriculum in 1955 is provided in Table 1, showing emphasisin Mathematics, Chemistry, Physics, six engineering sciences, and an integrated study ofengineering analysis, design, and engineering systems for professional background15. Page 13.1044.5 Table 1: Summary of Time Distribution for Scientifically Oriented Engineering Curricula Item Curriculum Weight 1 Humanistic and Social Studies One fifth 2 Mathematics and Basic Sciences (about equal One fourth
the mathematics curriculum was chosen that demonstratedthe need to both substitute and integrate. This problem was provided by the faculty teachingintegral calculus as follows: The force due to friction F (N) needed to move an object with massm (kg) across a surface is F=μ.m, where μ (N/kg) is some coefficient that depends upon surfaceproperties and the gravitational constant. Consider a block of wax being pushed across asurface, leaving behind a trail of wax as it travels. Its mass is related to the distance the wax hasbeen pushed (x) and is given by m(x)=50-0.5x. Assuming that the coefficient μ=2, how muchwork is needed to push the block 100m across this surface? This problem and its solution arefurther detailed in equations 4 & 5
‘right’ answer is unnerving to students. Open-‐ended design problem-‐solving is a difficult concept for faculty to teach to students and for students to learn and internalize from faculty because addressing open-‐ended design problems requires an integrative approach that is not taught in analytic courses. In this study we have developed and refined the curriculum to produce students who are capable of, and confident in, holistically addressing open-‐ended problems in a design context. We have started the process of tracking our students’ comfort in addressing open-‐ended problems. To achieve this, we have taken a “baseline snapshot” of the
mathematics (STEM) educators in particular to engagetheir students in higher order modes of learning. The uneven rate at which writing and STEMreforms are implemented3,4 reinforces the need for a new approach to reform, one that isdiscipline specific and faculty-driven.The Writing-Enriched Curriculum (WEC) model is informed by shifts in the perception ofwriting itself. Since the mid-20th century, the traditional view of writing as a mode ofcommunication, has evolved. Guided by psycholinguistic research, the current, expanded view isthat writing is a mode of communication and learning. Writing is now recognized as an abilitythat students continue to develop throughout their academic education and later careers as theyengage with increasingly complex
Paper ID #33333Information Fluency Instruction as a Continuous Improvement ActivityDr. William W. Tsai, California State University Maritime Academy Dr. William W. Tsai is an associate professor in the Mechanical Engineering Department at California State University, Maritime Academy (Cal Maritime). His research background is fluid mechanics and heat transfer. In engineering education, he is involved in the incorporation of information literacy into the engineering curriculum. He is also involved in his program’s assessment, ABET accreditation activities, and the Institution-Wide Assessment Council. Before Cal Maritime
).1 In addition, for the purpose of shortening the route to real engineering world in front ofgraduates, it is clearly beneficial to further facilitate students making flexible use of engineeringknowledge they have assimilated in the classes and to strengthen the link between academictheorems and practical hands-on applications. Following this trend, a curricular and pedagogicalmodel for teaching multidisciplinary design to senior undergraduate students was presented.2 Asa result, a project-oriented capstone course at junior or senior year of undergraduate programshas been strongly required to balance the theory and practice in engineering education.3 Besides,an approach for engineering curriculum integration in capstone design courses to