information with the faculty to encouragefaculty to accommodate dominate learning styles. (Narayanan, 2007). Boylan is also of theopinion that students learn best when they have a visual representation and can manipulateobjects associated with the concepts.(Appalachian State University’s NCDE: National Center forDevelopmental Education)Implementation and Assessment The procedure used by the author is outlined in Appendix A. The author hassuccessfully utilized this very same procedure to conduct assessment in many other courses. Hehas reported this in his previous ASEE Conference proceedings and presentations. The rubrics used was obtained from Washington State University. This rubric has beenreproduced in Appendix B. Rubrics offer help
/manuals.nsf/websearch/876393DF257DB5B086256E55005A51CE , Accessed 3/12/152 Smyser, B. M. and McCue, K., “From Demonstration to Open Ended: Revitalizing a Measurements and AnalysisCourse”, Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Convention, San Antonio, TX 2012 Page 26.315.8
] −V (2)where V̂1, V ̂2 and V ̂3 are the unit vectors for the preceding z-axis, the current x-axis, and the nextz-axis respectively. Next, the scalar c is found in (3). Page 23.97.8 a [b] = [V]−1 [P3 − P1 ] (3) cThe point that describes the x axis is then computed in (4) ̂3 P2 = P3 + cV (4)where P3is the
the simplicity to be built bystudents over the course of five semesters. The work is designed to test two hypotheses: 1. A long-term design project that integrates knowledge from multiple courses strengthens student knowledge retention. 2. A large-scale design project requiring tools from many courses improves student problem-solving and design skills.By integrating five semesters of the mechanical engineering curriculum into a cohesive whole,this project has the potential to transform the way undergraduate education is delivered. Beforeand after testing is being conducted to assess: a) Change in retention between courses and b)Change in student problem-solving and design skills.Students at Rowan University have built almost all
-536, July 2002.8. Taylor, K. and Dalton, B., “Internet Robotics: A New Robotics Niche,” IEEE Robotics and Automation,Vol.7, No.1, pp.27-34, March 2000.9. "Bailey, S. A., Cham J., G., Cutkosky, M. R., Full, R. J., "Biomimetic Robotic Mechanisms via ShapeDeposition Manufacturing," Robotics Research: the Ninth International Symposium, John Hollerbach andDan Koditschek (Eds), Springer-Verlag, London, 2000. Page 25.396.12
Solaris One. Following a disastrous solar flare, two major systems on thespace station become unstable; the parabolic dish beaming energy back to Earth as well as theenergy distribution system running throughout the asteroid. To fix the two systems, there are Page 24.1092.3two mini-games that the player must complete to accomplish their mission. Because theasteroid is open to exploration, the games do not have to be completed in any particular order. Figure 1: An image of the interface for the rocket launch game.Figure 2: (a) A successful rocket launch (b) Rocket running off the track due to unbalanced energy production
, Linda, Roger Burton, Jonathan Stolk, Julie B. Zimmerman, Larry J. Leifer, Paul T. Anastas (2010) "The systemic correlation between mental models and sustainable design: implications for engineering educators" International Journal for Engineering EDucation 26(2) 438- 45026. Winner, Langdon (1986) "Do Artifacts have politics?" Ch 2 in The Whale and the Reactor, Chicago University Press27. Wright, Ronald, 2005. A Short History of Progress. Da Capo Press.March discussion: where are we stuck?The main area of this lively conversation evolved over two weeks, with an initial focus closer tothe posed question, and a later focus on more philosophical issues about the place of science andengineering (together and separate) in knowledge
AC 2011-2498: OPTIMAL DESIGN OF A PUMP AND PIPING SYSTEMCurtis Brackett, Bradley University I am a senior mechanical engineering major at Bradley University in Peoria, IL. I am originally from Aurora, IL. I am the team captain for Bradley’s Formula SAE senior project. I am very interested and plan on developing my career in the field of energy generation.David Zietlow, Bradley University Professor of Mechanical Engineering at Bradley University The primary author is Curtis Brackett, candidate for BSME May 2011 Page 22.1126.1 c American Society for Engineering Education, 2011
] Mouser Electronics, Inc. - A TTI and Berkshire Hathaway company, http://www.mouser.com/[9] Making Embedded Systems: Design Patterns for Great Software, Elecia White, ISBN-13: 978-1449302146,O’Reilly Media Inc., 2012.[10] Embedded System Design: A Unified Hardware/Software Introduction, Frank Vahid, Tony D. Givargis, ISBN-13: 978-0471386780, Wiley, 2002.[11] Embedded Systems: Introduction to ARM Cortex-M Microcontrollers, Jonathan Valvano, ISBN-13: 978-1477508992, Createspace, 2015.[12] http://news.stanford.edu/news/2013/december/lab-ina-box-120613.html[13] http://www.rsc.org/eic/2015/03/mooc-massive-open-online-course[14] https://www.coursera.org/course/physicalchemistry[15] https://www.coursera.org/course/hwswinterface[16] Ferri, B. H., &
semesters. The work is designed to test two hypotheses: 1. A long-term design project that integrates knowledge from multiple courses strengthens student knowledge retention. 2. A large-scale design project requiring tools from many courses improves student problem-solving and design skills.By integrating five semesters of the mechanical engineering curriculum into a cohesive whole,this project has the potential to transform the way undergraduate education is delivered. Beforeand after testing is being conducted to assess: a) Change in retention between courses and b)Change in student problem-solving and design skills.Students at Rowan University have built almost all of the “hardware” for the HPT (air engine,planetary gearset
designed and machined by students on a Boxford miniature CNC lathe [3].For each of these assignments students work in teams of two-to-three members, and documenttheir laboratory experience and their observations upon the results obtained in formal technicalreports. The grades students receive are based on (a) the technical content of their reports,(b) the overall quality of the parts they fabricate, and (c) their individual contribution to the teamassignment, assessed through anonymous peer reviews as described in reference [4].The Evaporative-Pattern ProcessAnnually over 11 million tons of metal are cast worldwide, mainly for the automotive, aerospaceand household appliance markets5. Of these, over 8% are cast by the evaporative-patternprocess5
: a) Start the Oscilloscope & Function Generator applet of the Virtual Lab. b) Generate a 100 Hz, sine wave with amplitude of 2V and a DC offset of 0V.Experiment: a) Measure, record and tabulate the DC and RMS values of the signal as you increase the DC offset on the Function Generator. Five to six measurements spanning the full range of the DC offset knob are sufficient. b) Plot the DC and RMS values of the signal as a function of the DC offset. c) Derive an equation for the RMS value of a sinusoid with a DC off-set. Compare your resulting equation with the plot generated for part (e). Figure 3: Java applet on simple circuits with resistors and AC/DC voltage sources.Resistive
stays entirely within its travel lane around corners. b) Robot stops within 0.05m of stop lines. c) At an intersection, robot exhibits less than 10 seconds of delay when intersection is clear. d) Robot completes passing maneuver around a stationary obstacle (of similar size to robot) within the modular section maintaining a safety buffer of 0.1m in front of and behind obstacle. e) Robot perpendicular parks in a designated parking spot.2. Required modified basic traffic rules are as follows. a) Robot stops between 0.1m and 0.25m behind a stopped lead vehicle. b) Robot travels at least half its maximum speed on straight-aways.3. Optional modified basic navigation rules are as follows
the coordination number and direction of contact in the hard sphere model of BCC(Figure 1d) Page 26.313.3 a) b) c) d) Figure 1. The five bases used in this experiment.a. Station 1At this station, students are presented two clear acrylic sided boxes (Figure 2). One box has theFCC (100) plane at its base while the second box’s base represents the simple cubic (100) plane.This station forces students to compare the structures and notice that they are equivalent planes
Rs is obtained.Blocked-Rotor TestUnder the blocked-rotor test, the speed of the motor is constrained to be zero, and hence, the slipis s 0 1 , which results in the simplified (approximate) equivalent circuit of Fig. 3. A series ofrelatively straight forward measurements, employing the two-watt meter approach, results invalues for Rr ' and Ll . The MUT for this lab is a NEMA B (National Electrical ManufacturersAssociation) and using empirical methods based on IEEE Standard 112, the total leakageinductance is split such that Lls ? 0.4 Ll and Llr ¦ ? 0.6 Ll . I a 0 I ra ' jys * Lls - Llr '+ Rr
4 1 0 3.25(b) I/O Addressing Format Exam I(c) Addressing Mode2. Understand and ConstructLadder Logic Programs NSF -ATE Labs 2, 3,(a) Instruction Set Relay, Timer, Module 1-10: 70.7 Final Exam 82 82.2 3 4 1 0 3.25 4,6,7Counter, Arithmatic, Exam IIComparison, File Instruction,3. Manipulate data using PLCinstruction sets NSF -ATE(a) Relay, Timer
project(s) for other groups of students. b. One or more areas are relevant to faculty’s personal research interests and faculty is/are willing to mentor one or more groups of students to continue the research. 3. Assuming positive answers to Step #2, the interested faculty develops a Progressive Research Project Master Plan. The Plan for a progressive research project must identify desired outcomes that can be achieved by successive groups of students in a series of 3- month research projects. This should be based on the results Step #1. Ideally this is done in conjunction with the students who completed the initial project. 4. Faculty, with students who have completed their project(s
Figure 1: Thought experiment for convection from a lightbulb. (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) TFigure 2: Choices for trends in temperature versus voltage input for the lightbulb thought experiment. Which of these describes plausible trends for T = f (V ) when the oncoming air velocity and temperature are constant, and V is the voltage applied to the lightbulb?V . Suppose we conduct the experiment where V is varied and the temperature of the lightbulbis measured. Which of the plots in Figure 2 represent the trend of T as a function of electricalpower input P = V 2 /R? Remember that the air temperature and air velocity are assumed to beconstant.Using our physical
Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering at Temple University specializing in electrical machines and power systems, multimedia tutoring, and control and optimization of dynamic systems. He has been the principle investigator of a project for the development of an intelligent tutoring shell that allows instructors create their own web-based tutoring system. His current research focuses on security of cyber-physical systems based on multiagent framework with applications to the power grid, and the integration of an intelligent virtual laboratory environment in curriculum. He is an associate editor of Dynamics of Continuous, Discrete and Impulsive Systems: Series B, and is a member of IEEE, ASEE, and Sigma Xi
Template and Scoring VIThe leader robot is also programmed inside a template, as shown in the Figure 3. This templatealso includes the scoring measurement of the total radians of movement of the leader robot. Thefinal score is calculated by multiplying the radians of movement by the percentage of the timethe follower was over the silver tape. This final scoring metric determines the amount ofmovement where the robots were “synchronized” (within the desired range of distance of eachother).Figure 3: Phase 1 Leader Robot Template and Scoring VI B. Competition RulesThe robots have 30 seconds to build up their score by traveling back and forth across a roundblack panel that has an approximate diameter of 4’ with 2” white ring around the outside
the support of the work that led to thispublication.References[1] L. D. Feisel and A. J. Rosa, “The Role of the Laboratory in Undergraduate Engineering Education,” Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 94, no. 1, pp. 121–130, Jan. 2005.[2] J. G. Balchen, M. Handlykken, and A. Tyss, “The need for better laboratory experiments in control engineering education,” in Proc. 8th IFAC Triennial World Congress, Kyoto, Japan, 1981.[3] O. Boubaker, “The inverted pendulum: a fundamental benchmark in control theory and robotics,” in Education and e-Learning Innovations (ICEELI), 2012 international conference on, 2012, pp. 1–6.[4] B. Taylor, P. Eastwood, and B. L. Jones, “Development of a Low-cost, Portable Hardware Platform to
and solution taken by the group (the video that you are watching). a. Comment on the steps and modifications that you think align with your team’s process–were these steps justified in a similar way? b. Comment on the steps and modifications that you do not think align with your team’s process – do you agree with their justifications?2. Suggest changes for the solution that students are watching.Phase III: Revisiting Solution and Sheet Metal Forming Design ProcessStudents were instructed to turn in an individual report with the following:1. Student’s proposed final design - with sketches (students can use the provided drawing and mark the changes on it or provide hand sketches.)2. The step
. Page 24.683.7 Table 1 – Symbol Library for FEASYExamplesFigure 2 shows an example of a bracket being modeled in FEASY and the deformation results inANSYS.Figure 4 shows an example of a two-dimensional cantilever beam with a point-load applied at itsend illustrating the sketching process. The user sketches a rectangle with one input stroke ingeometry mode (black ink) as shown in Fig. 4(a). The sketch beautified by the system is shownin Fig. 4(b). The user then switches to „symbol‟ mode to select the boundary conditions, loads,and dimensions (shown in red). On pressing the „process‟ button, the system processes the inputand the result is shown in Fig. 4(c). The user selects material properties as required to
the educational process1. Program outcomes are in essence statements ofthe skills, knowledge, and behaviors that are attained by the time students graduate froma program. Although all of the eleven “a-k” program outcomes specified in the criteriaare important in laboratory courses, at least three have particular bearing: b. an ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data. d. an ability to function in multidisciplinary teams. g. an ability to communicate effectively.In the newly developed mechanical engineering program at Central Michigan University,these program outcomes are integrated throughout the required laboratory courses.Laboratory SequenceAfter their initial exposure in the freshman
laboratory equipment available for them to use. These includedresistance thermometers, signal generators, voltmeters, oscilloscopes, connectors etc. Theobjective of the laboratory was for the students to test the claim that the two physical systemswere equivalent systems and to justify their answer using experimental data. Page 25.432.4Fig. 1 (a): Components for electrical system. (b) Thermal system (box with a power resistor that serves as a heat source)The expectation was that students would synthesize previously covered lecture content to discernwhat they would have to do to test the claim. In this case they
useLabVIEW as the computing platform for data acquisition. For the majority of the experiments inthe haptic paddle series, real-time computing is not required, and therefore a standard desktop PCwith a DAQ card is sufficient. Second, the PXI systems offer a versatile platform for use inother courses, in capstone projects, and in research. Therefore, it is felt that this investmentoffers additional capabilities to the department beyond education in this single course, and suchbenefits offset the cost. (a) (b)Figure 5. LabVIEW graphical programming environment for sensor calibration experiment. (a)Front panel for sensor calibration experiment (b) Wire diagram3.2. Computing softwareAn
work. The Pre-Study Survey is provided in Appendix B. 3. A Post-Study survey of attitudes used many of the questions from the Pre-Study survey and some additional questions aimed at determining the students’ experience in the laboratory during the term. The Post-Study Survey questions that were not on the Pre- Study survey are listed in Appendix C.The average age of the study group is 26.8. Two thirds of the study group has a job and work anaverage of 18.5 hours per week. The high fraction of working students is consistent with theurban location and university mission of access. The study group consists of 58 percent civilengineering majors, 38 percent mechanical engineering majors and 4 percent from other
studentswere exposed to robotics and engineering design concepts via a) two elective consecutiverobotics courses, b) college and high school mentorship opportunities, c) leadership roles duringthe robotics club and outreach day activities, and d) involvement with the IEEE Region-5robotics design contest. The traditional robotics lectures were transformed into project-basedhands-on design and implementation experiences in classroom and laboratory environments byteams of 3-5 students with the highest level of diversity. The open-ended robotics design contestprovided a challenging environment to effectively ensure superior engineering design skills andenhanced critical and creative thinking, communication, teamwork, and project management.Robotics-I
,Microsoft Excel was connected to the program to record the sensor values in real-time. Once thedata is recorded, Excel’s built-in tools were used to calculate the slope of the recorded data. Inorder to calculate slope, the following equations were used. (1) (2) (3) where x and y are the variables N is the number of values a is the intercept point of the regression line b is the slope of the regression line r is
lab.Comparison of lab reports produced by students who performed the virtual lab to those producedby students performing the experiment physically in the lab showed few discernable differences.References1. V. J. Nickerson, J.E. Corder and J. Chassapis, “A Model for Evaluating the Effectiveness of Remote Engineering Laboratories and Simulations in Education,” Elsevier Ltd., 2005.2. B. Balamuralithara and P.C. Woods, “Virtual Laboratories in Engineering Education: The Simulation Lab and Remote Lab,” Wiley Periodicals Inc., 2007.3. M. Ogot, G. Elliot and N. Glumac, “An Assessment of In-Person and Remotely Operated Laboratories,” Journal of Engineering, pp. 57-65, 2003.4. J. Trevelyan, “Lessons Learned from 10 Years Experience with