conversion system laboratory setup. International Journal of Electrical Engineering Education; 50 (2), 111-126. 8. Zhang, H. and Zhu, S. (2013) ‘Internet-based Electrical Engineering Lab Integrates Real and Virtual Experiments, 8th International Conference on Computer Science and Education (ICCSE) Location: Sri Lanka Inst Informat Technol, Colombo, Sri Lanka, Apr 26-28, 2013. 9. Harnack, J. et al. (2012) ‘Assessment of the efficacy of learning modules on FEM instruction,’ Proc. ASME Intl. Mech. Eng. Congress and Expo. 6, 451-459. Page 24.471.10
ofTechnology. They also acknowledge the use of the images from projects in the class (Appendix D).References[1] Grose T. K., 2012 “Wow the Audience”. ASEE Prism, http://www.prism-magazine.org/dec12/tt_01.cfm[2] Nicometo C., Anderson K.J.B., Courter S., McGlamery T., NathansKelly T., “Vital Skills in Engineering: Communication”. School of Education: University of Wisconsin-Madison, http://www.cirtl.net/files/Communication.pdf[3] Shook J., 2009 “Toyota’s Secret: The A3 Report”. MIT Sloan Management Review, http://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/toyotas-secret-the-a3-report/[4] Leipold K., Landschoot T., 2009, “Utilizing an A3 report format for a technical review at the end of a cornerstone design course”. ASME International Design Engieneering
been an enthusiastic group of faculty on the CRC and strongsupport from the department chair. Future challenges include ensuring effective coordinationamongst courses and involving additional faculty in the teaching of project-based courses.References1. NAE, The Engineer of 2020: Visions of Engineering in the New Century, National Academies Press, 2004.2. Sheppard, SD, Macatangay, K, Colby, A, Sullivan, WM, “Educating Engineers: Designing for the Future of the Field,” The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, 2008.3. Danielson, S., A. Kirkpatrick and E. Ervin, “ASME Vision 2030: Helping to Inform Mechanical Engineering Education” Proc. FIE Conference, Rapid City, SD, 2011.4. Kotys-Schwartz, D., D. Knight and G. Pawlas
Teaching Practicum providesa competitive advantage to the mechanical engineering doctoral degree at Georgia Tech. Theconsensus opinion appears to be in retaining the current topics in the course. Considerationshould be given for adding a session(s) on obtaining research funding and preparing grantproposals. Also, since many graduates do not enter academia, more coverage could be spent onadditional topics from industry and other career paths.Bibliography1. Wankat, P.C., Oreovicz, F.S., Teaching Engineering, McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1993.2. Norris, Pamela M., Palmer, Sheila C., Effectiveness of the Woodruff School Doctoral Teaching Intern Program,Journal of Engineering Education, Volume 87, No. 3, 1998, pg. 223-2263. Lowman, Joseph, Mastering the
Technology ABET, On-Line, http://www.abet.org/forms.shtml, accessesJanuary 2011.6. Jack Zable, Guest Editorial 2007 National Capstone Design Conference, Advances in Engineering Education,Spring 2010, pp. 1.7. Carlee A. Bishop and Tommer R. Ender , Capstone Projects: Key to the Lifecycle Development of the SystemsEngineer, Proceedings, 2nd National Capstone Design Conference, Boulder, CO, June 2010, CD RAM.8. Shraddha Joshi, Joshua D. Summers, Investigating Information Loss in Collaborative Design: A Case Study withCapstone Design Project, Proceedings, 2nd National Capstone Design Conference, Boulder, CO, June 2010, CDRAM.9. Daniel A. McAdams and Julie S. Linsey [dDesign Education: A Globally Distributed Capstone EngineeringDesign Experience
. Minimize tunnel length by placing lines in the same tunnel. 5. Use a "Z" network (see Figure E2). 6. Avoid pipe velocities in excess of 8 ft/s. 7. The two AHUs in Concourse 4 are to be placed in parallel.Include the converged Kirchoff or Hardy-Cross solutions, and make sure your logic is explained.Accomplish a preliminary system design and provide: 1. Layout of the network; (a) actual physical layout (pipe numbers indicated) (b) “Z” arrangement for Kirchoff or Hardy-Cross usage (pipe and loop numbers indicated); Page 22.1650.12 Figure
tests, pre and post-affectsurveys, will also be administered to the students to gauge the effectiveness of challenge-basedlearning in MECE 3320.References1. Pandy, M., Petrosino, A, Austin, B. and Barr, R. “Assessing Adaptive Expertise in UndergraduateBiomechanics,” Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 93, No. 3, 2004, pp. 211–222.2. Barr, R.E., Pandy, M.G., Petrosino, A.J., Roselli, R.J., Brophy, S., and Freeman, R.A., “Challenge-BasedInstruction: The VaNTH Biomechanics Learning Modules”, Advances in Engineering Education, Vol. 1, No. 1,Fall 2007, pp. 1 – 30.3. Bransford, J.D., Brown, A.L., and Cocking, R.R., “How People Learn : Brain, Mind, Experience, and School”(Expanded Edition), National Academic Press, (2000).4. Giorgio, T.D. and
) 480-488.9. S. Ersoy and H. Kucuk, ―The effect of a new teaching methodology on learning performances of automotive – mechatronics students,‖ Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 2 (2010) 310-316.10. F.P. Beer, E.R. Johnston Jr, J.T. DeWolf, and D.F. Mazurek, Statics and Mechanics of Materials, McGraw-Hill, NY (2011). Page 25.395.14
. Student and Faculty Perception of Engagement in Engineering. Heller, Rachelle S., Beil, Cheryl and Dam, Kim. 3, s.l. : Journal of Engineering Education, 2010, Vol. 99, pp. 253-261.3. Embedding Laboratory Experiences in Lectures. Morgan, James R., Barroso, Luciana R. and Simpson, Nancy. 4, s.l. : Advances in Engineering Education, 2009, Vol. 1, pp. 1-31.4. The State of Water in Living Systems: From the Liquid to the Jellyfish. Henry, M. 2005, Cellular and Molecular Biology, Vol. 51, pp. 677-702.5. The Debate on Evolution Won't be Won in the JAVMA. Lugten, Peter. s.l. : Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, 2001, Vol. 216, pp. 857-858.6. Entropy Based Assessment of Written Albanian Language. Borici, Saif al Zahir &
, New Jersey, U.S.A.: Prentice Hall.3) Bloom, B. S., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Handbook I: The Cognitive Domain. New York, NY, U.S.A.: David McKay Co. Inc.4) Dziegielewski, B., Kiefer, J. C., Opitz, E. M., Lantz, G. L., Porter, G. A., (2000). Commercial and Industrial End Uses of Water. Washington, DC: American Water Works Association.5) Oertel, H., Prandtl, L. (2004). Prandtl’s Essentials of Fluid Mechanics. Boehle, M., Mayes, K., (Eds.). New York, NY: Springer.6) Calvert, J. B. (2003). Turbines. In Tech Index, University of Denver. Retrieved from http://mysite.du.edu/~jcalvert/tech/fluids/turbine.htm#Refs
Texas A&M University and a Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering from the University of Michigan. Page 15.1271.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2010 Towards More Efficient Practices and Methods for ABET AccreditationAbstractFor many institutions, maintaining ABET accreditation(s) requires a significant investment offaculty and financial resources. This is especially the case since the Technology Criteria 2000were introduced requiring a greater emphasis on continuous improvement processes andoutcome-based assessment. With each review cycle, the standards for demonstrating
≠ A recognition of the need for and an ability to engage in lifelong learningBibliography1. Steif, P. S., “Initial Data from a Statics Concept inventory,” Proceedings of the American Society forEngineering Education Annual Conference, Salt Lake City, Utah, June 20-23, 2004.2. Philpot, T. A., Hubing, N., Flori, R. E., Hall, R. H., Oglesby, D. B., and Yellamraju V., “Computer-Based Instructional Media for Mechanics of Materials,” International Journal of Engineering Education,Online Papers, 2005.3. Younis, N. T., “Experimental Method of Caustics for Civil and Mechanical Engineering Students,”Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference, Portland, Oregon,June 12-15, 2005.4. Perry, C. C., “The Resistance Strain
::). The cell that’s value must bechanged during the iteration process is identified (A9). By clicking on the Solve button, thevalues of the cells are automatically changed for the desired solution. A new dialog box opensconfirming that the Solver found a solution, as shown in Fig. 4-c. The Solver returns a value of26.063 oC for the dew point temperature, as shown in Fig. 4-d.Exercise 5:Moist air enters a duct at 10 oC, 0.101 MPa, relative humidity of 75%, and a mass flow rate of3.0 kg/s. Air is heated at a rate of 60 kW as it flows through the duct. No moisture is added orremoved during this process. Evaluate the temperature and relative humidity of the exit.Solution:Identifying the duct inlet as state 1 and the exit as state 2, the following
beencorrected by the authors. (S)he also mentions that “The first sentence in the third paragraph ispatently untrue”. This is obfuscating since it is not clear to the authors whether the reviewer isreferring to the first sentence of the third paragraph in the abstract or that in the section on“Introduction and Philosophy”. Nevertheless, we examine both and make a change to the firstsentence of the third paragraph in the abstract: • “Problems in polar coordinates are complex in comparison to those in rectilinear coordinates. This is because of the requirement of symmetry boundary conditions or the neglect of constants of integration to avoid singularity type of errors when solving polar coordinate problems analytically.” has been
.). How are fatigue related tests used to develop S-NFatigue curves with endurance limits that depend on N # of cycles? Does the “knee” exist in theS-N Fatigue curve for the material of the selected mechanical component? Describe the relevantfatigue tests, failure criteria and fatigue failure mechanisms for the mechanical component.Discuss various failure theories (e.g., Ch. 6 of textbook6) including maximum-distortion-energytheory (i.e., von Mises), maximum shear stress theory, and “Mohr and Modified Mohr” theories.Discuss bi-axial failure criteria for biaxial loadings. Discuss failure as it relates to tri-axialloadings. Discuss failure due to ductile vs. brittle materials. Discuss the role that the generalform of the von Mises stress equation
: Professor: Session Topic(s) Instructional Objectives – By the end of this session students shall be Real-World able to: Example 1 (Leave blank until SFIP starts) … 30 Page 23.1114.8First week of the SFIP The SFIP kicks off on the first week of
; Moline, D. (2003, June), Learning To Write:Experiences With Technical Writing Pedagogy Within A Mechanical EngineeringCurriculum Paper presented at 2003 Annual Conference, Nashville, Tennessee. 10.18260/1-2-11457[9] Smith, S., & Watt, A., & Carvill, C., & Williams, J. (2002, June), Integrating Writing IntoTechnical Courses Paper presented at 2002 Annual Conference, Montreal, Canada. 10.18260/1-2-10296
taught during the course of the project(Carrico et al., 2020). Conversely, in a service learning project involving both engineering andeducation students implemented in an after-school STEM club, communication and leadershipskills in engineering students increased (Keshwani and Adams, 2017), It is possible that thepressure to prepare for an audience of school children forced the college students to put morefocus on communicating to their intended audience. Thus, interprofessional service learningsuccesses may be dependent on the end user(s) of the service learning project (the elementarystudents of the STEM club vs. developing a tool for a speech-language pathologist to use whenthe patient being helped by the product is not part of the process
the CornellActive Learning Initiative.References [1] ABET, “2019-2020 Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs,” 2018. . [2] N. G. Holmes, J. Olsen, J. L. Thomas, and C. E. Wieman, “Value added or misattributed? A multi-institution study on the educational benefit of labs for reinforcing physics content,” Physical Review Physics Education Research, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 1–12, 2017. [3] S. Willner-Giwerc, K. B. Wendell, C. B. Rogers, E. E. Danahy, and I. Stuopis, “Solution diversity in engineering computing final projects,” in ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, 2020. doi:10.18260/1-2–35198. [4] L. D. Feisel and A. J. Rosa, “The Role of the Laboratory in Undergraduate Engineering Education,” Journal of Engineering
determine the effectiveness of the project at meetingskillset-based course outcomes (course outcomes a, b, c, and h), individual performance on thoseoutcomes by students that complete the project will be compared to the performance of students whodo not.AcknowledgmentsThis work began at an Innovating Curriculum with an Entrepreneurial Mindset workshop organizedby KEEN. I would like to acknowledge the critical feedback and support provided by workshopfacilitators Andy Gerhart, Glenn Gaudette, and Brad Dennis, as well as the ongoing support andcoaching of Heather Dillon.References[1] R. Marra, D. Jonassen, B. Palmer, and S. Luft, “Why Problem-Based Learning Works: Theoretical Foundations.,” J. Excell. Coll. Teach., 2014.[2] C. L. Dym, A
with our assessment plan for at least one academic year, we willcertainly identify several areas of improvement to modify the course even further. Theinvestigators plan on continual refinement of the curriculums to match as closely as possible tostudents learning expectations.References 1. Mynderse, J.A., Gerhart, A. L. , Liu, L., & Arslan, S., (2015). Multi-course problem based learning module spanning across the junior and senior mechanical engineering curriculum: mechatronics, fluid mechanic and heat transfer. 122nd ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition. 2. Wild, P., Surgenor, B., & Zak, G. (2002). The Mechatronics laboratory experience. Mechatronics, 12(2), 207-215. 3. Hsu, T. R. (1999). Development
through the rest of theacademic year. With the expansion of the data, we hope to arrive at more definitive conclusionsregarding this popular educational topic.References[1] J. L. Bishop and M. A. Verleger, "The Flipped Classroom: A Survey of the Research," in 120th ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Atlanta, 2013.[2] M. Prince, "Does Active Learning Work? A Review of the Research," Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 93, no. 3, pp. 223-231, 2013.[3] J. E. Fogarty, "Assesment of Flipped Classroom in Upper-Level Engineering Coruse," in American Society for Engineering Education, 2017.[4] M. H. Holdhusen, "A "flipped" statics classroom," in 122nd ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Seattle, 2015.[5] R. Bachnak and S. C
familiar with the basics of an app for their device(s). Therefore, it wasdesired to combine these two, and create a free, intuitive app that can be used to calculate thedrag and lift coefficients of any two-dimensional cross-section. It was also desired to use thistool to enhance the average engineering student’s understanding and exposure to the fields ofaerodynamics and fluid mechanics. These goals were accomplished by integrating three maintechnologies: a high performance cluster, finite element method, and mobile applications.The high performance cluster was utilized to handle the interaction between a graphical userinterface and a finite element code while alleviating the burden of memory and processorrequirements from the user’s device
ABET accreditation.1 Lohmann, J., “EC2000: The Georgia Tech Experience”, Journal of Engineering Education, July 1999, pp. 305 –310.2 Bailey, M., Floersheim, B. and Ressler, S., “Course Assessment Plan: A Tool for Integrated CurriculumManagement,” Journal of Engineering Education, October 2002, pp. 425 -434.3 Felder, R., and Brent, R., “Designing and Teaching Courses to Satisfy the ABET Engineering Criteria,” Journal ofEngineering Education, January 2003, pp. 7 – 25. Page 12.1314.13
catastrophic or simply costly due to pump inefficiencies whenoperated outside of its intended operating range. Therefore, undergraduate mechanical engineersshould be well trained in this design or selection process through analytical and experimentalmethods learned in engineering science and experimental course work, respectively.In this light, to gain an understanding of the operation of the centrifugal pump4, first consider theenergy transfer of a pump by applying the steady state form of the energy equation as follows: Ç V2 Ç V2 Q% - W% s ? m% outlet Èh - - gz Ù / m% inlet Èh - - gz Ù (1) É 2 Ú
). Cognition in the Wild. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.6. Lave, J., & Wenger, L. (1991). Cognition in Practice: Mind, Mathematics, and Culture in Everyday Life. Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press.7. Lumsden, G., & Lumsden, D. (2004). Communicating in Groups and Teams. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth /Thompson Learning, Inc.8. McShane, S. & Von Glinow, Mary. (2006). Organizational Behavior. McGraw-Hill Higher Education Publishers.9. Webb, P. and Palincsar, A. (1996). Group processes in the classroom. In D. Berliner & R. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of Educational Psychology (pp. 209-243). New York, NY: MacMillan
can be downloaded at the project website Page 14.600.20www.me.ua.edu/ExcelinME.Acknowledgement This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. DUE-0633330. The authors gratefully acknowledge support from this NSF award.DisclaimerAny opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are thoseof the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.ReferencesASHRAE, (2005), Handbook of Fundamentals, http://www.ashrae.org/Chappell, J., Taylor, R. P., and Woodbury, K. A. (2008) “Introducing Excel-based Steam
Lake City, UT. 5. Reay, N. W., Li, Pengfei, & Bao, Lei. (2008). Testing a new voting machine methodology. American Journal of Physics, 72(2), 171-178. 6. Winer D. (2003). What makes a weblog a weblog? [Weblogs at Harvard Law Web site] http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/whatMakesAWeblogAWeblog#vignetteAndWikis Accessed January 14, 2009. 7. Vygotskoy, L.S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. In: Cole M, John-Steiner V, Scribner S, Souberman E, trans-eds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 8. Ocker, R.J. & Yaverbaum, G.J. (2001). Collaborative learning environments: Exploring student attitudes and satisfaction in face-to-face and asynchronous computer