. The objective was to ensure that all design technology graduates possessedan understanding of technology management practices in the areas of production, planning, andcontrol; quality control; safety; and management specifically. The goal was to improve the levelof understanding of technology management among graduating design technology graduates.An initial study of the students’ performance was completed in the spring of 20121. In this study,the performance of design technology majors on their understanding of technology managementwas ascertained. The criterion for success included (a) a 91% pass rate for all who sat for thecertification exam and (b) for those who did not pass the exam, the number of correctly answeredexam items will fall
description of the anticipated size and configuration. A minimum of eight individual parts were required. 2. Presentation of detailed dimensions for each individual part. Hand sketches of the configuration including final sizing of each part with particular emphasis on mating dimensions. 3. Complete 3D CAD models of parts and assembly. 4. Final set of dimensioned drawings. Specifically: a. Isometric of assembly b. Orthographic of assembly c. Exploded view of assembly d. Parts list e. Dimensioned views of each parWhile the course content was the same, it should be mentioned that the semester length andprofile of the students is slightly different than during the fall or spring
, Conceptualisation in Visuospatial Reasoning Tasks: A Case for Exploring, in Engineering Design Graphics Division 68th Mid-Year Conference. 2013: Worcester, MA.5. Sweller, J., J.J.G. vanMerrienboer, and F.G.W.C. Paas, Cognitive Architecture and Instructional Design. Educational Psychology Review, 1998. 10(3): p. 251-296.6. McGilchrist, I., The Master and His Emissary: The Divided Brain and the Making of the Page 24.314.6 Western World. 2009, England: Yale University Press.7. Tversky, B., Functional Significance of Visuospatial Representations, in The Cambridge Handbook of Visuospatial Thinking, P. Shah and A. Miyake
courses in 3D modeling, virtual collaboration, 3D data interoperability, and graphics standards and data exchange. Professor Hartman also leads a team in the development and delivery of the online Purdue PLM Certificate Program and in the development of the next-generation manufacturing curriculum at Purdue focusing on manufacturing systems and the holistic product lifecycle.Amy B Mueller, Purdue University, West Lafayette Amy B Mueller is a Clinical Assistant Professor in the College of Technology, Purdue University, West Lafayette campus. She received her BS in ME from Purdue University and her MBA in Information Systems from the University of Toledo. Before joining the faculty in 2012, Ms. Mueller spent over 30
on the document camera) B. In-class exercise completed as a team 10 minutes at each table C. Computer module completion 15 minutes D. Open lab time to work on all 35-40 minutes homework problemsAfter the students completed the in-class exercise, students (voluntarily) came up to the front ofthe room to share with the class how his/her team created the drawing. Also, while each tablewas working on the in-class exercise, the instructor and two Teaching Assistants (TAs) walkedfrom table to table to offer guidance and/or check that the students’ drawings were donecorrectly.Each module typically had four worksheets that represented
Paper ID #9556A review of the design intent concept in the context of CAD model qualitymetricsMr. Jeffrey M. Otey, Texas A&M UniversityProf. Pedro Company P.E., Universitat Jaume I His research fields of interest are centered on Computer Aided Desig, and Sketch-Based Modeling; with more than 30 papers and communications published on those areas. Now he is taking part in the devel- opment and applicability of a new sketch-based modeling interface (see http://www.regeo.uji.es/). He has been involved too in Emotional Design and Collaborative Product Engineering. (https://sites.google.com/a/uji.es/pedrocompany/)Dr. Manuel
Paper ID #10152Graphics within Initial Technology Teacher Education: A Snapshot of Ire-land and USADr. Diarmaid Lane, University of Limerick Diarmaid is a Lecturer in Technology Teacher Education at the University of Limerick. His research interests are in the areas of freehand sketching, cognition and spatial visualization. He is currently Director of Membership of the Engineering Design Graphics Division (EDGD).Dr. Theodore J. Branoff, North Carolina State University Ted Branoff, Ph.D. is an associate professor in the department of STEM Education at North Carolina State University. He has been an ASEE member since
. Zoltowski, and W. C. Oakes, “Collaborating Interaction Design in Engineering Projects in Page 24.519.11[2] Community Service(EPICS),” in Soaring to New Heights in Engineering Education, Seattle, WA, 2012, pp. 1141–1146.[3] J. Scholtz, M. A. Whiting, C. Plaisant, and G. Grinstein, “A reflection on seven years of the VAST challenge,” in Proceedings of the 2012 BELIV Workshop: Beyond Time and Errors-Novel Evaluation Methods for Visualization, 2012, p. 13.[4] M. Whiting, K. A. Cook, C. L. Paul, G. Grinstein, B. Nebesh, K. Liggett, M. Cooper, and J. Fallon, “VAST Challenge 2013: Situation Awareness and
illustrations b) Finger is used to rotate virtual object Figure 2: Touch Screen Used for Interactive SV TrainingThe SVT app creates a grid in a small assignment window and a corresponding grid on a largersketching window. Both the assignment and sketching windows have a designated starting dotand the user must begin his sketches such that the starting dots and the grid match between theassignment and sketching windows. The SVT app interface is very simple with a single color pentool, an eraser, and the ability to clear all sketch lines by shaking the iPad. Figure 3 shows boththe assignment and sketching windows to demonstrate the simple exercise of drawing a cube.One of the key features of the SVT app is the automated
facilitate the transferability of successfulpractices to other institutions that want to increase student’s spatial visualization skills.1. Carter, C.S., Larussa, M.A., and Bodner, G.M. (1987). A Study of Two Measures of SpatialAbility as Predictors of Success in Different Levels of General Chemistry. Journal of Researchin Science Teaching, 24(7), 645-657.2. Maloney, E.A., Waechter, S., Risko, E.F., and Fugelsand, J.A. (2012). Reducing the SexDifference in Math Anxiety: The Role of Spatial Processing Ability. Learning and IndividualDifferences. 22, 380-384.3. Sorby, S., Casey, B., Veurink, N., and Dulaney, A. (2012). The Role of Spatial Training inImproving Spatial and Calculus Performance in Engineering Students. Learning and IndividualDifferences
). Spatial ability through engineering graphics education. International Journal Of Technology & Design Education, 23(3), 703-715. Page 24.982.78. Branoff, T. J. (2000). Spatial visualization measurement: A modification of the Purdue Spatial Visualization Test -Visualization of Rotations. Engineering Design Graphics Journal, 64(2), 14-22.9. Guay, R. (1977). Purdue Spatial Visualization Test: Visualization of Rotations. W. Lafayette, IN. Purdue Research Foundation.10. Bodner, M. G., & Guay, R. B. (1997). The Purdue Visualization of Rotations Test. The Chemical Educator, 2(4), 1-17.11. Howell, D. C. (2013). Statistical Methods
strategy (J2), which contained 5sketched features, 4 copy features, one hole and one edge feature. Two additional parts weremodeled to determine whether the feature types would affect the complexity index calculations.Part A, shown in Figure 6, was modeled using only extrusions for A1, and a combination of Page 24.1093.6revolve and extrude features for A2. Part B, shown in Figure 7, was modeled using onlyextrusions for B1 but included a blend feature for B2. Results of the complexity calculations forparts modeled with these alternative strategies are shown in Table 1. Note that parts K and J weremodeled using the same collection of features for the
: Examining practicing professionals. Engineering Design Graphics Journal, 68(2), 14-26.17. Hartman, N. W. (2009). Defining expertise in the use of constraint-based CAD tools by examining practicing professionals. Engineering Design Graphics Journal, 69(1), 6-15.18. Peng, X., McGary, P., Johnson, M., Yalvac, B., & Ozturk, E. (2012). Assessing novice CAD model creation and alteration. Computer-Aided Design & Applications, PACE, (2), 9-19.19. Rynne, A., Gaughran, W. F., & Seery, N. (2010). Defining the variables that contribute to developing 3D CAD modelling expertise. In E. Norman & N. Seery (Eds.), Graphicacy and Modelling. The International Conference on Design and Technology Educational Research and Curriculum
minutes long and after this time their attention begins to dropdramatically. Breaking up the lecture can refresh their mind and help to keep them engaged3.PollEverywhere.com, an online real time service for classroom response, was adopted due to itssimple web interface and instant feedback analysis. Figure 1 (a) shows a snapshot of the concepttest question on a power point slide and Figure 1 (b) demonstrates the corresponding studentresponses on PollEverywhere.com. Page 24.728.3 20 18 16 14
prove to be more definitive as the spring scale components in theassembly project had several curved surfaces. It is likely more difficult for novices to properlydimension multiple curved features in comparison to dimensioning multiple linear features of anobject.References1 Fisher, B. R. (2013) Geometric Dimensioning and Tolerancing Visual Glossary with GD&T At-A-Glance Sheets.Sherwood, OR: Advanced Dimensional Management LLC.2Gay, D. & Gamebelin, J. (2013). Modeling and Dimensioning of Structures: An Introduction. Hoboken, NJ:Wiley-ISTE.3 Sriraman, V. & DeLeon, J. (1999). Teaching Geometric Dimensioning and Tolerancing in a Manufacturing
. Mohler, J.L. (2008). A review of spatial ability research. Engineering Design Graphics Journal, 72(2), Retrieved from http://www.edgj.org/index.php/EDGJ/article/view/4921. Carroll, J. B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor-analytic studies. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press.22. McGee, M. G. (1979). Human spatial abilities: Sources of sexual differences. New York: Praeger Publishers.23. McArthur, J.M., & Wellner, K.L. (1996). Reexamining spatial ability within a piagetian framework. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(10), 1065-1082.24. Baenninger, M., & Newcombe, N. (1989). The role of experience in spatial test performance: A meta-analysis. Sex Roles, 20, 327-344.25. Deno, J.A. (1995