1: Summary of computer software in the BSME Curriculum at Clemson University and possible insertions of PLM concepts and software tools The introduction of PLM materials into the undergraduate Mechanical Engineering programcan strengthen the computer skills and virtual design process knowledge of students. Freshmanwould learn about PLM concepts with concepts seminars that offer an overview of digitalprocesses. Sophomore year continues with concept seminars now focused on graphical conceptsplus a CAE software package. By junior year, students will have an understanding of how differentgraphical concepts can enhance the usage of PLM and work with another CAE software. In theirsenior year, when the students complete design
. In particular, thepaper addresses the use of photoelastic images to enhance the learning of stressconcentration factors. Student reaction to the new approach is assessed and presented.IntroductionMechanical engineering students are introduced to the concepts of stress and strain in asolid body through the Strength of Materials course. The principles and methods used tomeet the learning objectives are drawn from prerequisite courses in statics, physics, andcalculus together with the basic concepts of elasticity and properties of engineeringmaterials. Perhaps, an analysis of the effects of stress concentrations is also discussed.In the first Machine Design course, junior mechanical engineering students learn to get astress concentration
engineeringdynamics class8; Holdhusen talked about a flipped statics course9; Lee et al., flipped a mechanicsof materials course10; etc., while others have partially flipped one11-16. Most of these flippedclassroom models were related to student-centered learning theories, such as, active learning,peer-assisted learning, cooperative learning, collaborative learning, problem-based learning, peertutoring, etc.17-22. However, in general, most of them have not followed any specific theoreticalframework. This paper describes a flipped Solid Mechanics course that has been designed andtaught during the Spring 2015 semester at Arizona State University, following the Interactive,Constructive, Active, and Passive (ICAP) framework by Chi et al.23.According to Chi et al
AC 2009-1311: SUPPLEMENTAL TEACHING AIDS AND QUALITYENHANCEMENT PLAN FOR MECHANICAL ENGINEERING PROGRAM ATALABAMA A&M UNIVERSITYAmir Mobasher, Alabama A&M UniversityMohamed Seif, Alabama A&M UniversityKenneth Fernandez, NASA Marshall Space Flight CenterShowkat Chowdhury, Alabama A&M University Page 14.1099.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2009 Supplemental Teaching Aids and Quality Enhancement Plan for a Mechanical Engineering Program at Alabama A&M UniversityABSTRACTMost mechanical engineering majors experience difficulties in their major courses like Statics,Dynamics, and Strength of Materials. It seems appropriate to increase the
engineering courses.Results from surveys and focus groups of both students and faculty are presented, along withrecommendations for improving assessment instruments and processes. The students enjoyedthe case studies and believed that they contributed to learning the course material. The casestudies stimulated their interest. Most faculty who had participated in the one-day case studyworkshop and who responded to the survey had made at least some use of the cases in theircourses. The respondents that had used case studies believed that the benefits justified the cost.Introduction Over the past three years research has evaluated the impact of including failure casestudies in specific civil engineering and engineering mechanics courses. The
Paper ID #14279The Mechanism of the Engineer’s Cultivation through Combining Trainingwith Scientific Research——Practices and Cases of Training Excellent Engi-neer in National University of Defense Technology (NUDT)Prof. ZhongLi FU, Center for National Security and Strategic Studies (CNSSS) In National University of De-fense Technology (NUDT). FU Zhong Li is deputy director of the Center for National Security and Strategic Studies (CNSSS) In Na- tional University of Defense Technology (NUDT).In this role, he manages NUDT’s Continuing Education reform and leads excellent engineer training research projects. He has conducted
abstractconcepts presented to them. Exams and homework assignments are among the standard toolsused to assess students’ performance and comprehension of course material. Student ability isdetermined by the quality of the written answers and by how well they document the processused to solve a problem. However, they provide only limited opportunities to reveal the viewingstrategies used that may give additional insight into how students initially approach the givenproblem.In the present study, we use a within-subject experimental design to investigate the relationshipbetween spatial visualization abilities of students and how students solve specific problems in thearea of mechanics of materials. We employ a non-invasive eye-tracker (Tobii X-60) to
to meet the needs of the mechanical engineering discipline, the Army, or the nation.The Balsa Wood Glider -1st Design After covering fundamentals of aerodynamics and how they apply to aircraft wingsstudents are given the assignment to design build and fly their first glider. They now understandsome basics on how lift is produced, why an airfoil section is preferable to a flat plate, and areknowledgeable about such parameters and concepts as aspect ratio, taper ratio, wing twist, wingsweep etc. The objective of the first design is to simply design, build, and fly an efficient lowspeed glider with a minimum lift to drag ratio (L/D) of 6. Constraints are minimal and allowstudents to be creative in their solution. The materials provided
Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2004, American Society for Engineering Educationmany times more. According to Jenkins1, retention of information by students who only look atpictures is about 30%, which is 3 times more than retention of reading material. On the otherhand, when learning exercises are conducted with an active learning content, retention increasesto 70% for talks, discussions and presentations, and to 90% for demonstrations, lab experimentsand written reports.The benefits of active learning have long been recognized in engineering. Mahendran2 describestwo projects adopted at Queensland University of Technology in Engineering Mechanics andSteel Structures courses. Engineering Mechanics was
test methods and procedures. The laboratory manuals of this time periodappear to establish the writing standards for manuals of latter years by way of content andformatting choice.Authors continued writing new laboratory manuals throughout the 1970s and 1980s which showlittle indication of advancing engineering education. They followed the same format and contentfound in manuals from the 1930s.Current soil mechanics laboratory manuals are stuck in the past. These laboratory manualsappear to be modified replicas of ASTM standards and contain no new material or teachingstrategies.Although soil mechanics testing procedures haven’t changed significantly throughout the years,the path in which professional engineering practice has followed is
3380 - Kinematics and Dynamics of MachinesThis course is aimed at introducing Junior-level students to issues involved in the kinematicsynthesis, dynamic analysis, and "optimal" design of co-planar mechanisms, with an emphasis onfour bar linkages. The course content is summarized in Table 1.Lecture SummariesCondensed summaries of each lecture are posted on the course web-site with links to additionalasynchronous tutorial material as appropriate. A portion of the summary of one lecture is given inFigure 1. In this case the link is to an interactive WM2D simulation, shown in Figure 2, which Page 8.183.2clearly illustrates the effect that
ofmultiple areas makes the instruction of robotics courses a challenging task. Traditional roboticscourses in mechanical and electrical engineering mainly focus on the analysis and modeling ofclassical robotic systems such as a two-to-six degrees of freedom robotic manipulator arm or asimple wheeled mobile robot. However, as more and more new branches of robotics areemerging in recent years (nanorobotics, biology-inspired robots and so on), it has become clearthat materials covered in traditional robotics courses are not sufficient for students to solve newproblems or create new robotic systems. It is therefore imperative that robotics courses beupdated, and in many cases, redesigned to account for new branches of robotics that call onstudents to be
. Doster), December 1996.5. S. Hayden, “Calibration and Evaluation of the Prompt Gamma Facility of the NCSU PULSTAR Reactor for Boron Neutron Capture Therapy,” Undergraduate Research Report, NCSU, (advised by K. Verghese and M.S. Yim), December 1996.6. A. Sakabe, “Calibration Experiments for Nuclear Well Logging,” Undergraduate Research Report, NCSU, (advised by R. Gardner), November 1996.7. J. Velez, “Mechanical Properties of Nuclear Materials Using an Automated Ball Indentation Tester,” Undergraduate Research Report, NCSU, (advised by K.L. Murty), December 1996.8. A. Loeb and Z. Kaplan, “A Theoretical Model for the Physical Processes in the Confined High Pressure Discharges of Electrothermal Launchers,” IEEE Trans. on Magnetics
elements, and mechanism as awhole. Following the sequence mentioned above did allow each student to build aknowledge base leading to the open-ended design project assignment. Groups of two orthree students designed and presented various mechanisms that included eccentric andlobed cams, ordinary cranks, crank sliders, and some bar mechanisms. During theprojects, groups were also exposed to concepts such as materials and process selection,tolerances, clearances and assembly, fasteners, adhesives and joining. NC (NumericallyControlled) laser cutter hardware allowed students to cut and engrave various types ofmaterials with minimal design effort in AutoCAD or Corel Draw.Student response and feedback to the course and especially to the
topics.Figure 1: Book Cover Page 14.628.2Organization of the Book The short introductory chapter discusses the overall organization of the book, notes to thestudent, and sources for case study materials. After the introductory chapter, the other ninechapters address statics and dynamics, mechanics of materials, structural analysis, reinforcedconcrete structures, steel structures, soil mechanics/ geotechnical engineering/ foundations, fluidmechanics and hydraulics, construction materials, and management/ ethics/ professional issues.The chapters were written to parallel courses and topics typically taught in civil engineering, aswell as engineering
length of theframe at key locations that projected onto graph paper to magnify the small angular deflections.Using basic mechanics of materials, a model relating the angular deflection and the appliedtorque was used in order to determine the torsional rigidity of the frame. The results include thedetermination of the torsional rigidity along the frame, the calculated torsional rigidity at thepoint of interest (the front axle), and a comparison to a finite-element model. The torsionalstiffness at the front axle was calculated experimentally to be 1187 ft-lb/degree. The FEA modelpredicted a torsional stiffness of 1100 ft-lb/degree, which is within 10% of the experimentallydetermined value. The cost of the entire experimental setup was
AC 2011-896: ASSESSING AND UPDATING AN UNDERGRADUATE THERMO-FLUIDS LABORATORY COURSEGregory J. Michna, South Dakota State University Gregory Michna is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Mechanical Engineering at South Dakota State University. He received his Ph.D. from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign in 2006, held positions as a Lecturer at Iowa State University and as a Post-Doctoral Research Associate at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, and joined the faculty at SDSU in 2009. He teaches courses in thermodynamics, fluid mechanics, heat transfer, and energy systems. His main research interests lie in the areas of thermal management of electronics and two-phase heat transfer.Stephen Gent
, many lab experiments are still divorced from what worklooks like as an engineer. To encourage student engagement with engineering technical contentin a realistic manner, a set of laboratories is in development for a sequence of two coursescovering statics, solid mechanics, and material properties. These courses are part of a non-disciplinary engineering program and start second semester sophomore year and continuethrough first semester junior year. The labs are inquiry-based and meant to be completed in oneto two 100-minute lab periods, providing students with multiple distinct problems to addressthroughout the courses.The labs are motivated by design briefs providing a real-world problem. Students must apply thecontent learned in class to
Paper ID #9483A Case For a Reform in Teaching Introductory, Fundamental EngineeringMechanics CoursesDr. Peggy C. Boylan-Ashraf, Stanford University Dr. Peggy C. Boylan-Ashraf is a postdoctoral research scholar in the Department of Civil and Environ- mental Engineering at Stanford University. Her research interests lie at the intersection of solid mechanics and engineering education, particularly in the areas of a new paradigm in teaching introductory, funda- mental engineering mechanics classes (statics, mechanics of materials, and dynamics).Dr. Steven A. Freeman, Iowa State University Dr. Steven A. Freeman is a
Page 6.620.7 Proceedings of the 2001 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright 2001, American Society for Engineering Educationthe Materials Properties and Metrology modules did not score as well, perhaps due to the factthat there were equipment malfunctions in both of these laboratory sessions. We plan toreevaluate the approach taken in these modules so that improvements in both content anddelivery can be made.Final evaluation of the project will be at the end of the Spring 2001 semester. A panel consistingof our industrial partners, a Mechanical Engineering faculty member from another university inour region, a faculty member from the UT-Tyler College of Engineering
Annual Conference and Exposition, 2019.C.J. Lissenden, G.S. Wagle, and N.J. Salamon, “Applications of Finite Element Analysis forUndergraduates,” ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, 2002.The Materials Society, Verification & Validation of Computational Models Associated with theMechanics of Materials, The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society, 2019.D.W. Mueller, “Introducing the Finite Element Method to Mechanical Engineering StudentsUsing MATLAB,” ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, 2003.M. Pike, “Introducing Finite Element Analysis in Statics,” ASEE Annual Conference andExposition, 2001.N. Smith and J.L. Davis, “Connecting Theory and Software: Experience with an UndergraduateFinite Element Course,” ASEE Annual Conference and
per specimen placed in different locations on the test sample. Theexpansion of the metal will be recorded with the LabVIEW software in conjunction with lineardisplacement transducer. Material strain will also be recorded with strain gauges to determinehow much stress the sample places on the fixture during expansion. All data collected will becompared with theoretical data to ensure accuracy of the testing instrument. An erroranalysis will be performed and adjustments to the testing instrument will be completed ifnecessary. Upon completion of the project, the hands-on lab will be taught to theengineering students in Manufacturing Engineering Technology (MFET) strength ofmaterials class and Mechanical Engineering Technology (MET) material
plastic bending, which is safe.stick material. Moreover, the FEA analysis shows that the maximum displacement of thin stick is δ!"# = 5.27mm ≈ δ!"#$%& = 5.82mm δ!"#$%& − δ!"# Err = = 9.45% δ!"#$%&The FEA analysis shows that the component is safe and well-working. VIII. CONCLUSIONThe extensive application and development of high-speedproducing technologies reduce cost for companies. The studyof the paper, describing five-mechanisms(untwisting,straighten, rapid air feeder, block vibratory feeder, insertingand
Session 1447 Mechanical Engineering Technology Division: “Integrating Culture as well as Engineering Instruction in Capstone Project and Machine Design Courses” Francis A. Di Bella, PE (617 373 5240; fdibella@coe.neu.edu) Assistant Professor, School of Engineering Technology Northeastern University; Boston, MAC.P. Snow’s famous 1959 Rede Lecture on the clash of the “Two Cultures”: Art andScience continues to reverberate in the halls of science and engineering education. Snow’slecture brought to the surface what seemed apparent to most
theultimate form since it is a replica of real engineering practice. It is worth noting that PBL isalready existent in many engineering curricula, most notably through senior design courses andeven materials science/engineering14. In addition, there are at least two works that explained theuse of finite-element analysis (FEA) to better explain concepts in introductory mechanics ofmaterials courses15,16.This paper discusses an effort by the author in conducting a PBL class project in a junior-levelFEA course, using the ANSYS software, at the University of New Mexico (UNM). This was thesecond time that the author has taught the class and the first in which he assigned such class Proceedings of the 2005 ASEE Gulf-Southwest Annual
of courses on particle transport, deposition and removal andre-entrainment was developed. The course materials are available on the web the coursewas taught it at two campuses simultaneously. The CRCD courses are composed of fourmodules: • Fundamental of particle transport, dispersion, deposition and removal. • Computational modeling of particle transport, deposition and removal. • Experimental study of particle transport, deposition and removal. • Industrial and environmental applications of particle transport, deposition and removal.In this paper, the course development project is outlined and various modules of thecourse are reviewed. Particular attention is given to the new application modules of thecourse in
AC 2011-1540: INTEGRATING A NONTRADITIONAL HANDS-ON LEARN-ING COMPONENT INTO ELECTRICAL AND ELECTRONICS COURSESFOR MECHANICAL ENGINEERING STUDENTSKathleen Meehan, Virginia Tech Kathleen Meehan is an Associate Professor in the Bradley Department of Electrical and Computer En- gineering at Virginia Tech. Prior to joining Virginia Tech, she worked at the University of Denver and West Virginia University as well as having worked 12 years in industry. Her research interests include optoelectronic materials and devices and high heat load packaging in addition to Electrical Engineering pedagogy.David Fritz, VA Tech
Instructional Associate Professor in the Mechanical Engineering department at Texas A&M. He teaches in the areas of materials, manufacturing, and design. His interests are in the areas of Engineering Design for Disciplinary STEM Educational Research, Team Formation and Team Skill Education.Dr. Carlos R. Corleto, Texas A&M University BS, MS, PhD in Mechanical Engineering from Texas A&M University. Experience includes 20 years in industry as a lab director, technical manager and engineering advisor, 8 years of academic experience at the assistant and tenured associate professor level, and two years as a Professor of Practice. Author and contributing author of 10 patents and multiple publications/presentations at
from 37-35 persons) with and without the hands-on element. These threestatics classes received the same lecture material, via a uniform syllabus, while one of thesections had the concrete experiences integrated into the lectures. The three sections wereeach taught by a different instructor. Common tests were administered, and uniformlygraded, to all three sections in an effort to accurately assess the level of comprehension.To demonstrate the uniformity of the classes a Statics Readiness Test (or pre test) wasadministered by the Virginia Tech Engineering Science & Mechanics (ESM) department.This test attempts to define the skill level of the students about to participate in the Staticsclass.Table 1. Comparison of scores with and without
engineering mechanics and civil engineering courses.Results from surveys and focus groups of both students and faculty are presented, along withrecommendations for improving assessment instruments and processes. The students enjoyedthe case studies and believed that they contributed to learning the course material. The casestudies stimulated their interest. Most faculty who had participated in the one-day case studyworkshop and who responded to the survey had made at least some use of the cases in theircourses. All fourteen respondents that had used case studies believed that the benefits justifiedthe cost.Introduction Failure case studies may be used in engineering courses to address technical topics aswell as non-technical topics, such as