Page 11.1380.6The ABET a through k Program Outcomes are listed below in Table 1. Potentially, a Co-op Table 1. ABET Criterion 3. Program Outcomes and Assessment. Engineering programs must demonstrate that their graduates have: a) an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering b) an ability to design and conduct experiments as well as to analyze and interpret data c) an ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs d) an ability to function on multidisciplinary teams e) an ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems f) an understanding of professional and ethical responsibility g) an ability to
2006-2483: INTEGRATING COMMUNICATION-INTENSIVE CLASSES ANDCOMMUNICATION STUDIOS INTO THE LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITYCOLLEGE OF ENGINEERINGWarren Hull, Louisiana State University Warren Hull is the Engineering Communications Coordinator at Louisiana State University. He earned a B.S. in Mechanical Engineering from Louisiana State University and an M.S. in Environmental Health from Harvard University. He is a licensed Professional Engineer with nearly 40 years engineering experience. Prior to joining LSU he was an engineering consultant. He is also a retired U.S. Air Force officer.Lillian B Bowles, Louisiana State University Lillian Bridwell-Bowles is a Professor of English at Louisiana State
University. He got his B.S. from Jingdezhen Ceramic Institute in mechanical engineering in 1997, and M.S. from Shanghai Jiaotong University in computer engineering in 2001. His research areas include computer network, bin packing, and statistical data analysis.Arun Srinivasa, Texas A&M University Arun Srinivasa is an Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering at Texas A&M University. He earned a B. Tech from Indian Institute of Technology in 1986 and a Ph.D. from University of California, Berkeley, 1991. His current areas of interest include plasticity of metals and polymers; thermomechanics of dissipative processes, dislocation dynamics, Cosserat continua, design and
2006-1986: USING COMPUTATIONAL SOFTWARE ROOT SOLVERS: A NEWPARADIGM FOR PROBLEM SOLUTIONS?B. Hodge, Mississippi State University B. K. Hodge is Professor of Mechanical Engineering at Mississippi State University (MSU) where he serves as the TVA Professor of Energy Systems and the Environment and is a Giles Distinguished Professor and a Grisham Master Teacher. He is the author of more than 170 conference papers and archival journal articles and served as President of the American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) Southeastern Section for the 1999-2000 Academic Year. He was the 2004-2005 Chair of the Mechanical Engineering Division of the ASEE at the national level.Rogelio Luck
consulting companies have also developed products of their own. One popular program4developed by the National Institute of Standards (NIST) consists of using two different circuitboard assemblies to simulate two different lines of products as shown in Figure 1. Test A B C E A B C D E D 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5
Mechanics Courses”. Journal of Engineering Education. April, 1997: 159-166.[4] Moaveni, Saeed. Finite Element Analysis: Theory and Application with ANSYS. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education, 2003.[5] Prince, Michael. “Does Active Learning Work? A Review of the Research”. Journal of Engineering Education. July, 2004: 224 -231. APPENDICESAPPENDIX: A An outline of a comprehensive example included in the manual is provided for illustration.APPENDIX: B Some cases are included as an illustration of the problem set included in the manual. Page 11.123.7 APPENDIX
: a) identifying part features or characteristics that affect partinsertion and fastening, b) identifying part features or characteristics that affect part handling andc) using solid modeling software to verify that mating parts will assemble. The data also suggest that industry desires more emphasis on the following “class-room”learning experiences: a) complete a design project using DFMA guidelines/checklists andb) make a part using rapid prototyping; and “non class-room” learning experiences: a) visit localindustry, b) do a summer internship in industry, c) complete a term in industry (co-op ed.). Lastly, the data show that most engineers do not learn their DFMA methods and conceptsin their undergraduate program. Rather
order to maintain uniformity, GTAs randomly assigned each team one of the following 8topics: 1) levee construction in New Orleans 2) looting and government response in New Orleans3) debris removal in New Orleans 4) contamination issues in New Orleans 5) rebuilding NewOrleans 6) Asian tsunami of December 2004 7) San Francisco and earthquake preparedness and8) Galveston and hurricanes. No teams in a single workshop section received the same topic. Forthese eight assigned topics, students were given sub-topics to address during their presentations,as indicated below. 1. Levee Construction in New Orleans a. Discuss what factors were used to design the original levee system b. Discuss failure of the levees c. Discuss
submitting a further refined version of the papers and will definitely have theauthors submit their final submission by March 1 or earlier. Please call me on this if at allpossibleCollegially Page 11.634.2 Faculty Perspectives on Instructional Collaborations Faculty A Faculty B College of Technology School of Manufacturing Engineering & Design Purdue University Dublin Institute of TechnologyIntroductionReasons for Collaboration • Gain perspective of other country approaches • Increase understanding of international dynamics • Build
: 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
ENGINEERING AN ENGINEERING PUZZLE WITH A LIBERAL ARTS APPEAL Ashraf M. Ghaly Michael J. Bogino ghalya@union.edu bogino@union.edu Union College 807 Union Street, Schenectady, NY 12308 Abstract: Engineering students are required to take courses in the Liberal Arts and the Humanities. Liberal Arts students, on the other hand, are not required to get the same level of exposure to technical subjects. A new course has been developed to address this issue. It is entitled Under Construction. The course will be open to both Liberal Arts and Engineering students at
1A). With development of the Technion Mathematics Web tutoringsystem the classes were reduced to one hour a week (Figure 1B). A. Lectures 4 h Classes 2 h B. Lectures 4 h Classes 1 h Web tutorials C. Lectures 4 h Classes 1 h Web tutorials Supplementary applications classes 1-2 h Figure 1. Multivariable Calculus outlines: A. Conventional; Page 11.779.4 B. Computerized; C. Applications integratedIn our study the course
− xb f X ( x) = xe FX ( x) = 1 − e for x>0, b>0 bMaking use of the fact that1 solving the equation FY ( y ) = x for y as a function of x, where FY ( y ) is the cumulative distribution function for the random variable Y, allows one to generaterandom numbers y from uniformly distributed numbers x, 0 < x < 1. The Mathcad worksheetshown as Figure 11 illustrates this example and compares the results to theory
. Page 11.1183.3 (a) (b) Figure 2Synthesis of a Crank-Rocker MechanismAnother four-bar mechanism is illustrated in Figure 3. The crank-rocker mechanism consists ofa crank (O2B), a connecting rod (BC), and an oscillating arm (O4C). The arm oscillates when thecrank rotates 360°. The length of the arm is100 mm and the horizontal distance between the twofixed pivots (O2O4) is 160 mm. The mechanism to be designed has a time ratio of 1.16, anoscillating angle of 75° for the arm, and an angle of 40° from the left extreme position of the armto the horizontal. Figure 3Figure 4a depicts the two extreme positions of
Americanstudents from a position of almost no learning to better learning than the non-African Americanstudents were showing in the contrast group.A) Effect size = .99 Effect size = .70 B) Effect size = .39 Effect size = .91 0.30 0.30 Mean Gains on Science Questions Mean Gains on Science Questions Contrast Experiment 0.25
taskssatisfactorily and also gain sufficient experience through the process 1, 2. To address these issues, there are a number of initiatives that have been made to provideexperimentation facilities over the Internet 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9. None of these facilities are designed todeliver a laboratory course that is a part of a regular educational program. In addition to these,all these suffer from one or more of the three main drawbacks. These are: a) complexity indevelopment; b) higher cost; and c) single server can provide access to only one experiment at apoint in time. Although the Internet-based laboratory facilities have a number of potentialbenefits, these drawbacks hinder the process of gaining their popularity. The paper will describe the
placed on the far side of the simulated Public Switched Network (PSN).Among the many tasks, it is used to simulate congestion on the PSN by transferring largeamounts of data back and forth across the PSN.Figure 1 shows the general schematic of CNL. The laboratory houses the 24 computers thatconstitute the 24-node rack-mounted Beowulf as a central component of B-CEIL. Networkdevices are required to simulate a real-world PSN. This consists of a pair of T1-to-V.35 devicesto simulate a leased line8, a pair of DACs to aggregate or cross-connect different channels ofT1's, a pair of routers to provide WAN-to-LAN connectivity at each end of the leased line, andVoIP units on each end to simulate real-world voice grade channels. The Beowulf nodes andother
Plotting the Shear Diagram for the Beam F xSlide 2 Slide 6 A B V F V = L
. 1. While these demos allow the students to see fluidmechanics in action, they are still somewhat remote, particularly for those students sitting in theback of a large classroom. Furthermore, the students do not get to actually touch or run theexperiments themselves. Flow Parabolic surface (a) (b) (c)Figure 1. Some sample class demos used in the undergraduate fluid mechanics class: (a) a U-tube manometer with higher pressure on the right column, (b) a converging-diverging nozzlewith air flow from left to right demonstrating the Bernoulli principle of lower pressure at thethroat
, approximatelyevery three weeks. Table VI gives the topics and assignments usually pursued during the secondsemester.Meeting Meeting Topics AssignmentsOne A) Icebreaker – How did the break go? 1) Email a copy of your official spring class schedule What was the high point? 2) Email a copy of your full weekly time management schedule including BPR, BPN, BPC, POH, and HW time for B) Guaranteed 4.0 Plan each class along with a completed Check List. 3) Complete a Time Estimate Chart that matches your time management schedule by
Product Concept A Product Concept B Product Concept C Variables (Keep it Simple) (Middle of Road) (Heavy Duty) Course duration 1 semester 1 or 2 semesters 2 or 3 semesters Project sponsor Student or Department Department, Industry, Industry or Non-Profit Required Paper design w/ detail Prototype Production Sample deliverables drawings Number of faculty 1-2 50% 100% involved Role of faculty Consulant (Infrequent (1-2 as instructors, (1-2 as instructors
the car project).Students’ learning experience with the identification of stakeholders and stakeholderrequirements varied. While most of the students reported agreement on having learned theseconcepts, the responses were not as good as on other questions. Many students associatedstakeholders only to customers and users- and this can be attributed to three factors: a) moreinteractive class exercises need to be developed that can help the students understand the conceptof stakeholders and requirements better, b) the technical terms used in system design have to besimplified to make the students observe, analyze and use the concepts in their design, c) theattention span of students for in-class lectures is reduced in a lab environment. Students
) based upon provenpedagogical methods. The two course sequence is named VECTOR (Vitalizing ElectromagneticConcepts To Obtain Relevancy) and adapts existing teaching techniques and laboratories toaddress three inter-related objectives: A) Create an undergraduate curriculum in electromagnetics which is relevant to students and shows the impact of this field on emerging knowledge and technologies. B) Employ modern tools, skills, and techniques to emphasize fundamental concepts rather than teach legacy materials emphasizing rote, analytical solutions. C) Create an effective introductory EM course which will pipeline students into the electromagnetics-photonics curriculum at OSU, including graduate programs.These goals, described in
-based learning technologies. Page 11.106.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2006 An Exploration of Engineering Students’ 3D Visualization ProcessingAbstractThe goals of this study were to: a) Identify patterns in students’ processing of 3D modelspresented via drawings, interactive computer models, and physical models; and b) Identifydesign principles to guide the development of computer based simulations for enhancingstudents’ 3D visualization skills, based on the results of the processing analysis. Pairs of studentsenrolled in a Mechanics of Materials class were presented with
2006-630: THE ENTERPRISE PROGRAM: A VERTICALLY INTEGRATEDENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY CURRICULUMScott Amos, Michigan Technological University SCOTT J. AMOS is a Professor and Dean of the School of Technology at Michigan Technological University. He earned a BS in Electrical Engineering from the University of Utah,an MSEE from the Georgia Institute of Technology, and a PhD in Civil Engineering from the University of Florida.Michael Powers, Michigan Technological University MICHAEL N. POWERS is an Assistant Professor in Electrical Engineering Technology at MTU. He earned a BS in Mathematical Sciences from the USCGA in New London, CT and his MSEE from the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, CA
where he helped set up an innovative introductory engineering curriculum. Dr. Tanyel received his B. S. degree in electrical engineering from Bogaziçi University, Istanbul, Turkey in 1981, his M. S. degree in electrical engineering from Bucknell University, Lewisburg, PA in 1985 and his Ph. D. in biomedical engineering from Drexel University, Philadelphia, PA in 1990. Page 11.1434.1© American Society for Engineering Education, 2006 Communication Systems Toolkit As a Tool for InnovationAbstractIn previous publications, we have discussed the preparation1, the utilization2 and theeffectiveness3 of a
image file 3. Calibrate the scale on the image a. Click Measure – calibration – spatial b. In spatial pop up window click NEW c. Select a name for the new calibration and select the unit similar to the scale units d. Click Image icon e. Using the marker set the reference unit and enter the number of units in the unit window f. Click ok to close the calibration window 4. Select an area on the image for particle measurement a. select icon b. Using the rectangular block select the desired area on the image. (while selecting the area, make sure that the ruler is not included in the selected area) c
11.108.6References:1. K. Compton and S. Hauk, “Reconfigurable Computing: A Survey of Systems and Software,” ACM Computing Surveys, Vol. 34, June 2002, pp. 171-210.2. A. L. Slade, B. E. thNelson, and B. L. Hutchings, “Reconfigurable Computing Application Frameworks,” Proceeding of the 11 Annual IEEE Symposium on Field-Programmable Custom Computing Machines (FCCM), April 20033. W. J. Dally and C. L. Seitz., “The Torus Routing Chip,” Journal of Distributed Computing, Vol. 1, No. 3, 1986, pp. 187-196.4. S. Hauk, “The Future of Reconfigurable Systems,” 5th Canadian Conference on Field Programmable Devices, June 1998.5. M. B. Taylor et al., “The RAW microprocessor: A computational Fabric for Software circuits and General-Purpose
2006-204: FEEDING BACK RESULTS FROM A STATICS CONCEPTINVENTORY TO IMPROVE INSTRUCTIONPaul Steif, Carnegie Mellon University Professor, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pa Degrees: Sc. B. 1979, Brown University; M.S. 1980, Ph.D. 1982, Harvard University. Research area: solid mechanics and engineering education.Mary Hansen, Robert Morris University Mary A. Hansen Assistant Professor, School of Education and Social Sciences, Robert Morris University, Moon Township, PA Degrees: B.S. 1994, California University of Pennsylvania; M.A., 1996, M.S. 1999, Ph.D., 2005, University of Pittsburgh. Research Area: Educational Assessment
are facing the same direction. The usual application of this part is to sense alight reflection from a surface. In this application two QRB 1134s are set up opposite each otherwith the opposing sensor reversed from its partner sensor so that the photo emitter on sensor "A"faces the photo reflector of sensor "B" and the photo emitter of sensor "B" faces the photodetector sensor "A". This method allows for two sets of detector- emitter pairs facing each otherand only one is needed, so the second is disconnected. Connected in the manner described thereis one IR beam which is used to detect the passing of the projectile. The first of these twoQRB1134 pairs is used to detect the projectile at the first point, starting a counter circuit and