Paper ID #31429Appropriate and Ethical Finite Element Analysis in MechanicalEngineering: Learning Best Practices through SimulationDr. Benjamin B Wheatley, Bucknell University Benjamin Wheatley was awarded a B.Sc. degree in Engineering from Trinity College (Hartford, CT, USA) in 2011 and a Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering from Colorado State University (Fort Collins, CO, USA) in 2017. He is currently an Assistant Professor in the Department of Mechanical Engineering at Bucknell University (Lewisburg, PA, USA). His pedagogical areas of interest include active learning ap- proaches, ethics, and best practices as they relate to
. (a) Geometry (b) Material Properties (c) Mesh (d) Boundary Conditions Figure 1. Tensile testing modeling stepsFigures 2(a)-(b) demonstrate the deformation and stress distribution results. Simulations allowfinding the deformation and stress levels at every point in the material, whereas the experimentalresults indicate the bulk behavior of the material only. Students can explore various loadingconditions and visualize their effects on the specimen, and develop deeper understanding of thetheory. Such exposure to simulations in a specific project environment in an early fundamentalcourse is shown to better prepare students for
: a) Technical skills development and knowledge enhancement, which was addressed in the following assessment components: • Calculation and analyses • Prototype fabrication • Coding and simulation • Progress and final reports b) Promoting teamwork contribution, soft skills development, and appreciation of professional attitude and values, which was addressed in the following assessment components: • Participation and contribution • Project demonstration c) Miscellaneous assessment component was comprised of creativity, prototype appearance, and functionality of the prototype.Reflective Critique: Once the project was carried out with a group of students, the effectiveness ofthe project
audioexplanation of the lecture was embedded in the corresponding slides. In the PowerPoint withannotation videos, the instructor used a tablet and screen casting software (Camtasia) to writedirectly on the PowerPoints while audio and the screen annotations were recorded and captured.Figure 3 shows examples of each of the created video types. Figure 3: Examples of the different video types created by the instructor for the online content of the mixed-mode class, (a) Lightboard video, (b) Voiceover PowerPoint
Communication Skills in Engineering Students Paper presented at 2014 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Indianapolis, Indiana. https://peer.asee.org/200603. Erdil, N. O., & Harichandran, R. S., & Collura, M. A., & Nocito-Gobel, J., & Adams, D. J., & Simson, A. (2016, June), Preliminary Assessment of and Lessons Learned in PITCH: an Integrated Approach to Developing Technical Communication Skills in Engineers Paper presented at 2016 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, New Orleans, Louisiana. 10.18260/p.259444. Randi, J., & Harichandran, R. S., & Levert, J. A., & Karimi, B. (2018, June), Improving Senior Design Proposals Through Revision by Responding to Reviewer Comments Paper presented at 2018
(ASHRAE standards for example).4) The device must average the air velocity of the air in the duct with at least the number of points specified by ASHRAE standards.For this project, two teams of four students competed. To avoid replication, one requirement wasthat the physical principle of response of the device should be different. As a result, the projectshown in Figure 5-a was based on heat transfer and the prototype shown in Figure 5-b was basedon differential pressure. (a) (b)Fig. 5 Picture of Prototypes for the Duct Mounted Airflow Measurement System Project, (a)prototype based on heat transfer principles and (b) based on differential pressure.Project 2017
Paper ID #31009Design Course in a Mechanical Engineering CurriculumDr. Jamie Szwalek, University of Illinois at Chicago Dr. Jamie Szwalek is currently a Clinical Assistant Professor at University of Illinois at Chicago in Mechanical and Industrial Engineering.Dr. Yeow Siow, The University of Illinois at Chicago Dr. Yeow Siow has over fifteen years of combined experience as an engineering educator and practi- tioner. He received his B.S., M.S., and Ph.D. from Michigan Technological University where he began his teaching career. He then joined Navistar’s thermal-fluids system group as a senior engineer, and later brought
students working on the project. Inhind-sight, we should have had seven to 10 students both years. As stated in the introduction, wehad seven desired outcomes for each of the students. The rubric below shows the ranking foreach student in the study for the two years thus far. Each student was given a ranking on a 1-10scale assessing their observed performance in each area. Student C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 M Year 1 a 10 10 9.5 10 8 10 10 10 b 9 9 9 9 9 9 9.5 10 c 9
to minimize the thermal contact resistance betweenthe heat sink and simulator. A flat surface-thermocouples was placed on the top side of the block.Subsequently, a heat sink was mounted on the top of the block and fastened with a customdesigned clamp to ensure good contact at the interface and secure the heat sink against the wind.The assembly was installed inside the windtunnel and additional thermocouples were placed onthe side surfaces of the aluminum block, which were then insulated with foam insulation tape toensure that heat is mainly conducted to the heat sink. The complete assembly before installingthe thermocouples is shown in Fig. 1(b). Thermocouples were connected to NI-9213 cDAQ(National InstrumentsTM) based on LabVIEW for data
Paper ID #29212Pre and Post Tenure: Perceptions of Requirements and Impediments forMechanical Engineering and Mechanical Engineering Technology FacultyDr. Benjamin B Wheatley, Bucknell University Benjamin Wheatley was awarded a B.Sc. degree in Engineering from Trinity College (Hartford, CT, USA) in 2011 and a Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering from Colorado State University (Fort Collins, CO, USA) in 2017. He is currently an Assistant Professor in the Department of Mechanical Engineering at Bucknell University (Lewisburg, PA, USA). His pedagogical areas of interest include active learning ap- proaches, ethics, and best
assignments such as, theselection, quantity, tasks associated with each simulation, grading criteria, credit assigned, andstructure. All of these might influence student skill building, understanding of material, andproblem-solving performance. This paper aims to address: (1) comparison of student load relatedto assignments, and (2) assessment of student understanding of select theoretical concepts. Forthe comparison of student load, highlighted differences in the course sections include: (a)number of simulation assignments (3 - 10), (b) number of application assignments (none or 3),and (c) the credit given to these assignments (2.5% or 15%). Surveys were administered to assessstudents’ confidence in the usefulness of each simulation assignment, and
meeting arranged by the head ofthe department. Prior to the meeting, the Head of Department: a. Requests an annual report of the results and information uploaded in SAEP. b. Defines work-teams based on the student outcomes that the Faculty evaluated in SAEP. c. Defines Department Coordinators that will be responsible for observing and ensuring that all Faculty members that must evaluate student outcomes do so. d. Invites all Faculty – including those that evaluated student outcomes - to hold a meeting so that the work teams defined previously present an analysis of the semester evaluation.In the evaluation meeting, Professors suggest and propose
must gain proficiency in. In order to earna particular grade, the student must successfully complete parts according to the schedule shown intable 1 below: Required Number of Accepted Desired Grade Parts from Each Bin A 12 – 14 B 9 – 11 C 6–8 D 3–5 F 2 or less Table 1: Part Thresholds per GradeDeadlines are used at the
/formatting, Excellent (4): outstanding report. As with the Mastery examsassessments, the four scores are averaged at the end of the semester for grading (Table 2).Altogether, students earn a C-level grade by demonstrating competency on the proficiency levelexams combined with “fair” work on take-home applications of the material. B-level gradesrequire some combination of stronger work in the take-home applications or demonstratinghigher-order mastery of some of the course topics. A-level grades require both strong work onthe application assignments and full mastery of most of the course topics.Table 2: Grading Summary. Grading System Proficiency
with 35 students in a Thermodynamics coursein classroom setting and assessed following the lecture. The results, as summarized in theAppendix, indicate that this teaching method is effective in helping students understand theconcept of entropy. In our efforts to effectively communicate the concept of entropy we have made somesmall sacrifices in scientific accuracy, and sidestepped more complicated explanations. B. Assumptions about Prior Knowledge of the Students In order to effectively focus on the idea of entropy, this paper makes assumptionsregarding the reader’s prior knowledge. They include a basic understanding of the Zeroth, First,and Second Laws of Thermodynamics, the concept of equilibrium, the meaning of an
subsidiary competencies which are: (i)consistent with the text of the student outcome, and (ii) expressed as student work in thecurriculum. Thus, performance indicators provide the SO committee with targeted, specific,capabilities and/or experiences for which to assess student attainment of the SO in the Program.Our Program’s current set of performance indicators, for illustration, is given in Appendix A.(In our Program’s enumeration scheme, SO-3.b is the second performance indicator for SO 3.)Performance indicators are useful, and five observations based on our Program’s experience areoffered here. The first observation is that the text of a given performance indicator should hewclosely to the specific ABET language for the SO. The goal for a set
most impressive of all 12 projects, group 2 designed and manufactured an electric ceilinghoist with a triple gear reduction producing an overall gear ratio of 52:1. Their engineeringanalysis was a corroboration between hand calculations and SolidWorks simulation. Each shaft,gear, and bearing support was fully designed and then machined using an in-house CNCmachine. Figure 5 below is a picture of their machine during testing and assemble drawing. (a) (b) Figure 5. Electric ceiling hoist from group 2; (a) testing, and (b) assembly drawing.B. Sample 2: Group 3The students in group 3 did not have the level of machine shop experience observed in group 2,however their hoist managed perform reasonably well. This
form of the mechanism, students are required to use one simulation software,such as ADAMS, to build a virtual prototype for simulating the mechanism model and theend trajectory. Fig. 5 gives some available options that students can refer to. Thus, the“handwriting robot” is embedded into the teaching process of theoretical curriculum. At thesame time, students are able to access to at least one engineering software, which can helpthem apply their engineering knowledge in practice. (a) (b) (c) Fig. 5 Mechanisms capable of linear motion. (a) slider crank mechanism (b) screw mechanism (c) rack and pinion mechanismMechanical DesignThis course generally covers
guidingprinciples for online learning, we can ensure a viable student experience.Transformation to online learningThe Nanotechnology CourseIntroduction to Nanotechnology course was designed as an undergraduate engineering elective toexpose students to the material opportunities offered at the nanometer scale. The course contentis divided into (a) fundamentals, (b) tools for synthesis and characterization, and (c) applicationsof nanomaterials within devices and more broadly technology. Principles of Nanotechnologycourse is a graduate level course that is combined with the undergraduate course. Graduatestudents complete additional assessments that go beyond the undergraduate level assignments.The lecture content, however, is identical between the
go beyond the minimum requirements, they mustprovide any specialized sensors or actuators. B. Open Design Deliverables and TimelineTo facilitate progress and promote project management, the project is divided into fivedeliverables: project proposal, executive summary, mechanical prototyping, electronics and basiccode functionality, and final presentation. These deliverables guide the students through the designprocess from conception to presentation in a manner that is educational and professional. Moredetails of the deliverables are listed in Table 2.Table 2: Deliverable Assignments for Open Design Project Deliverable Description Completion
. McLeskey, and W.-Y. J. Lin, “A Review of the Effectiveness of Guided Notes for Students who Struggle Learning Academic Content,” Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, vol. 55, no. 4, pp. 226–231, aug 2011.[12] B. John, “Micro-collaborations in piazza,” Proceedings of the AIS SIG-ED IAIM 2013 Conference, 2013.[13] K. A. Kiewra, “Investigating Notetaking and Review: A Depth of Processing Alternative,” Educational Psychologist, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 23–32, jan 1985.[14] K. A. Kiewra, “How Classroom Teachers Can Help Students Learn and Teach Them How to Learn,” Theory Into Practice, vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 71–80, may 2002.[15] M. Laal and M. Laal, “Collaborative learning: what is it?” Procedia - Social and
: 𝑘𝑘𝑚𝑚−𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹 = 𝐴𝐴𝑒𝑒 (𝐵𝐵𝐵𝐵/𝐿𝐿) (4) 𝐸𝐸 × 𝑑𝑑 9A and B in Equation (4) are two unknown coefficients which will be determined by the dataanalysis. After each team completed their FEA simulation, they had thirteen-member stiffnessesvs. corresponding ratios d/L. Therefore, they could use data fitting to get two unknowncoefficients A and B.4. Discussions and conclusionsIn the spring of 2019, the faculty-guided bolted-joint member stiffness project was successfullyimplemented. At the end of the semester, we conducted a class survey from two sections of theFEA-related course. Thirteen
consideration of public health, safety, and welfare, aswell as global, cultural, social, environmental, and economic factors.” Relative to the legacy student outcome, it wouldappear that all of these aspects should be included. Therefore, EAC Criterion 3, Student Outcome 2 requires multiplePerformance Indicators to encompass all these characteristics.The second challenge is the design of experiments. The legacy student outcome (b) required that “students design andconduct experiments.” This was a challenge because Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering students do not oftendesign experiments. To achieve this outcome, experimentation was often artificially introduced in the curriculum. Thenew EAC Criterion 3, Student Outcome 6 more reasonably
: ______ Starting in class and finishing out of class, create a proposal for a plastic swag item that could be given away at student recruiting events. Make assumptions about the desired quantity and production cost per part. Then choose a design and production method. a. For the design, include a sketch or perspective view from solid model. Choose a polymer material. Also, give the rationale for your choice of product, its design, and material. b. The production method should be one of the five that you investigated. Give a rationale for your choice of production method. c. Provide an economic analysis. For your target production quantity, what would be the
Paper ID #28546Does the use of cumulative and practice tests further improve a blendedSTEM classroom?Prof. Autar Kaw, University of South Florida Autar Kaw is a professor of Mechanical Engineering at the University of South Florida. He is a recipient of the 2012 U.S. Professor of the Year Award (doctoral and research universities) from the Council for Advancement and Support of Education and the Carnegie Foundation for Advancement of Teaching. Professor Kaw’s main scholarly interests are in engineering education research, adaptive, blended and flipped learning, open courseware development, and the state and future of higher
undergraduate concentration in mechatronics.," Proceedings Frontiers in Education 35th Annual Conference. IEEE, pp. F3F-7, 2005.[3] D. Bradley, "What is mechatronics and why teach it?," International Journal of Electrical Engineering Education, vol. 41, pp. 275-291, 2004.[4] R. B. S. K. A. &. M. D. Roemer, "A spiral learning curriculum in mechanical engineering," American Society for Engineering Education, 2010.[5] T. H. a. M. J. Samuel Yang, "A GENERAL PURPOSE SENSOR BOARD FOR MECHATRONIC EXPERIMENTS," American Society for Engineering Education , no. AC 2007-1438, 2007.[6] J. a. N. S. Riofrio, "Teaching undergraduate introductory course to mechatronics in the mechanical engineering curriculum using Arduino," ASEE Annual
, active aerodynamic control systems, Tesla turbine design, and improving pre-requisite knowledge retention.Dr. John W. Sanders, California State University, Fullerton Dr. John W. Sanders is currently an Assistant Professor of Mechanical Engineering at California State University, Fullerton. He holds a Ph.D. and M.S. in Theoretical and Applied Mechanics from the Uni- versity of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, and a B.S. in Engineering Physics and Mathematics from Saint Louis University. His research interests include clean energy, solid mechanics, micromechanics of mate- rials, fracture mechanics, and STEM education research. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2020 A Curriculum
delicate balance between cleanroom capabilities vs. form factor, certain aspects of the sensor array were derived fromSolidWorks simulations of the fully constructed device. A prime example of this is the individualpressure sensor pitches of the array as presented in Figure 2(a). This distance was the result ofinputted dimensions for the known device elements (resistor width, resistor length, diaphragmsize, trace widths, and spacing between traces) and parametric equations tuned for distributing themost compact, yet manufacturable spacing of the diaphragms possible. Figure 2(b) displays the layout of an individual pressure sensor in the array with resistorsstraddling the edges of the membrane (hidden) in both orientations and joined by aluminum
on Teaching and Learning in Higher Education (ICTLHE 2012), Malaysia, pp. 183-190.[8] B. J. Zimmerman, “Becoming a self-regulated learner: Which are the key subprocesses?” Contemp. Edu. Psychol. vol. 11. no. 4, pp. 307-313, 1986.[9] P. R. Pintrich, “A conceptual framework for assessing motivation and self-regulated learning in college students,” Educ. Psychol. Rev, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 385-407, 2004.[10] S. M. Elias and S. MacDonald, “Using past performance, proxy efficacy, and academic self-efficacy to predict college performance,” J. Appl. Soc. Psychol, vol. 37, no. 11, pp. 2518-2531, 2007.[11] A. Bandura, Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control, NY: W. H. Freeman and Company, 1997.[12] C. D. Spielberger, Test
fluids were poured into the graduated cylinders after the entiresystem had been set up. The cost for materials and supplies for this apparatus is $123.76. (a) (b) Figure 1. The tripod damper system (a) CAD model, (2) prototype Figure 2. Fabrication of the tripod damper system2.2 ExperimentsThe lead weights connected to the cylinder filled with water were first pulled down to 2 inchesfrom their equilibrium position and then released from there to cause the oscillation of the leadsand spring within the water. Following the same approach, the oscillations of the system withinthe olive oil and maple syrup were also observed and recorded. The same