AC 2009-430: A SIMPLE, AFFORDABLE STEADY-STATE FIN HEAT TRANSFERMINI-LAB/DEMOMichael Maixner, United States Air Force Academy Michael Rex Maixner graduated with distinction from the U. S. Naval Academy, and served as a commissioned officer in the USN for 25 years; his first 12 years were spent as a shipboard officer, while his remaining service was spent strictly in engineering assignments. He received his Ocean Engineer and SMME degrees from MIT, and his Ph.D. in mechanical engineering from the Naval Postgraduate School. He served as an Instructor at the Naval Postgraduate School and as a Professor of Engineering at Maine Maritime Academy; he is currently a member of the Department
have been an option for post-secondary education with the premise of assisting students’ transition from school to workplace. Page 14.42.3These programs have been defined as structured educational strategies integrating academiclearning through productive work experiences in a field related to career goals 4, 5, 6.Groenewald7 determined that cooperative education has four core dimensions: “(a) an integratedcurriculum, (b) learning derived from work experience, (c) cultivation of a support-base, and (d)the logistical organization and coordination of the learning experience.” The basic concepts ofalternating school with work over a substantial
enable us to recommend further development of the proposedapproach and its use for project guidance in other institutions. A wider implementation wouldpose new research questions, related to the adaptation of mastery projects and their effectivenessin different situations.Bibliography[1] Jones, B., Valdez, G., Nowakowski, J., & Rasmussen, C. (1994). Designing Learning and Technology for Educational Reform. Oak Brook, IL.[2] Cannon-Bowers, J. and Salas, E. (2001) Reflections on Shared Cognition, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22, 195-202.[3] Pack, D., Avanzato, R., Ahlgren, D., Verner, I. (2004) Fire-Fighting Mobile Robotics and Interdisciplinary Design-Comparative Perspectives, IEEE Transaction on Education, 47(3), 369-376.[4
taken as positive x Example 1 Plotting the Shear Diagram for the Beam F x Slide 2 Slide 6 A B V F
policy. These were Collegial, Bureaucratic,Corporate/Managerial and Entrepreneurial.McNay15 offers a model, shown in fig 5, with two dimensions: ≠ Dimension 1 (vertical) Policy definition; ≠ Dimension 2 (horizontal) Control over implementation. Policy definition: loose Control of A Collegium B Bureaucracy Control of implementation implementation loose D Enterprise C Corporation tight Policy definition: tight Fig. 5 McNay ModelAnd four University types operating from the four quadrants of the McNay model: ≠ Type A, Collegium, this model has the freedom to
. Using Snort as a Packet Logger 1. In the SSH terminal, capture and log packets in binary format by typing /usr/local/bin/snort -b -L /home/student/BinCapture (Note: If the log file is not specified, Snort will create binary logs in /var/log/snort with the name snort.log.[timestamp].) 2. Wait no shorter than 10 seconds and press Ctrl-C to stop sniffing. 3. Check the names of the generated file by typing ls /home/student 4. The binary log file name looks like this: BinCapture.1160008555, in which 1160008555 is the timestamp. Your log file should have a different timestamp. 5. You can read the binary log file using Wireshark or Tcpdump. Type /usr/sbin/tcpdump -r BinCapture.[timestamp] 6. Record the last
design review each team created a PowerPoint presentation as anarrated slide show. The choice to have teams produce a narrated presentation rather than give a“live” talk was to separate effects of performance anxiety, not having English as the studentsprimary language, and public speaking skills from the technical content of the presentation. Pre-recorded presentations also prevented the common phenomena of running over the allotted classtime. The presentations were played during class on a computer projector and were followed byan open question-and-answer session. All three participating faculty evaluated design reviewusing a rubric (appendix B). Verbal feedback was provided to teams about weaknesses andstrengths of their design.Once teams
topicsas nodes in a graph, where arcs in the graph correspond to logical dependencies among topics.An arc from A to B means that topic A must be learned before B is possible. Now, any validtopological sort (extension of the dependency graph to a total order), is valid order to covertopics in the course.We have encountered several patterns of dependencies. In some cases, the graph dictates that theonly valid approach is to treat the original course topics as units. This situation is shown inFigure 3a. The white nodes represent topics drawn from one course and the gray nodes topicsfrom the other. The dependencies require all the white topics to precede the gray ones. This oftenoccurs when a curricular interface (rather than a thread) connects the
systems. Topics here includesystem modeling using Laplace transform, frequency domain, and state variable methods.Mathematical models are developed for various systems to include electrical, mechanical,aeronautical, and chemical systems. Control systems analysis and design techniques are studiedwithin the context of how each system is physically controlled in practice. Laboratory exercisesinclude feedback design and system identification. Computer design exercises include dynamicmodeling and control of various engineering systems. The course learning objectives are: a. Model the dynamics of various physical systems that include mechanical, electrical, and chemical components. b. Analyze a physical system that utilizes a
Project Based Introduction, 3rd ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2009. Page 14.370.93. Middendorf, W. and R. Engelemann. Design of Devices and Systems, 3rd ed.NewYork: Marcel Dekker, Inc.,1998.4. King, P. and R. Fries. Design of Biomedical Devices and Systems, 2nd ed. Boco Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2009.5. Karsnitz, J., S. O’Brien, and J. Hutchinson. Engineering Design An Introduction, 1st ed. New York: Delmar, 2009.6. Eggert, B. “Achieving Team Work in design Projects: Development and Results of a SpreadSheet Tool.” 2008 ASEE Annual Conference, Pittsburg, PA, June 2008.7. Zoltowski, C., W. Oakes, B. Myers. “Multi
of leadership are many and varied. It was not our intent to summarize all models or evenset forth a model for general consumption or dissemination. The model was and is intended tofocus the efforts of our college to define and meet leadership outcomes. For example, as will bediscussed in a later section, the model serves as a visual outline for a class that is being taught inthe college that includes the dimensions of leadership shown in the model. Page 14.11.4The model, shown in Figure 1, emerges from three critical dimensions of leadership: (a) theleader as person, (b) the leader in organizational systems, and (c) the leader in global
(average of all faculty). The scores are used as one mechanism toprioritize the topics in the topic list.In addition to the score each topic received, the authors used objective and subjective analysis to Page 14.54.4place each topic into one of three categories a) critical to the BSCE program, b) less critical tothe BSCE program (e.g. useful to a single discipline), and c) low priority. An example is givenin the “Application” section of this paper.Step 4Once the survey results have been synthesized and analyzed, the topic list is prioritized withtopics that must be included in the curriculum, placed in upper level or other courses outside
and e-Learning.Ivan Sopin, Armstrong Atlantic State University Ivan V. Sopin has received a B. S. in Computer Science from Armstrong Atlantic State University, Savannah, GA, where he continues his studies as a graduated student. Ivan’s research interests deal with investigating new interaction models for 3D Web interfaces in application to medical and engineering education.Carlos Sanchez, Armstrong Atlantic State University Carlos Sanchez is an undergraduate student at Armstrong Atlantic State University, and is working on obtaining his B.S. in mechanical engineering. His current areas of interest are robotics and aerospace applications. He hopes to pursue a graduate degree in mechanical
probe the ability of students to a)explain the societal context of engineering, b) explain the importance of pro-active communityservice, and demonstrate an inclination to continue such service in the future, c) exhibit anappreciation of communication with non-engineers and finally, d) challenge some of thestudents’ stereotypes regarding others. The service-learning project was executed incollaboration with a local not-for-profit organization. Reflections were conducted by thestudents by answering a set of carefully-phrased questions after conducting the project. Analysisof students’ responses as well as the implications of the trends obtained, are explained in thispaper. The recorded benefits of service learning are described and can be
outcomes: (a) An ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering An ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and (b) interpret data An ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs (c) within realistic constraints such as economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health and safety, manufacturability, and sustainability (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 communicate effectively The broad
some members of the team, you know I deal with Page 14.1343.11 that and clearly my evaluation of the project as a whole is dependent to some extent.”Grading, however, was not about whether the team produced a great product; but also on theteam’s performance on the design process. As another faculty member said: “It is the whole process. So I mean if they tried and they did an amazing job and happen not to produce the final product, then they might still get an A. If they had an easy task and did it and then didn’t try than challenge themselves more, then they might not get an A. They might not get a B.”For
-class time to write a memo in whichthey must: 1) Compare how their solution compares to the: a. Objectives identified in Assignment 1 b. Functions identified in Assignment 2 c. Specifications identified in Assignment 3 2) Summarize project progress and team performance. Items to address are: a. Is the team on schedule? Why or why not? b. What are the main challenges in completing the project?In addition, a third point must be addressed by each individual on each team. 3) Reflect on your own individual role in the project.Assignment five is not accompanied by formal lectures, but rather is meant to induce individualand group meta-analysis of the design process. The aim is that by identifying
produce films to either a)document test procedures and associated analysis (i.e., produce a short film in lieu of aconventional written laboratory report for some laboratory assignments) or b) act as owners of aproject and develop testing request to provide to the students at the partner university. Studentgroups were each provided camcorders for use in the classroom as well as for outside theclassroom for studio and field work. Facilities were available at both universities for videoediting and production. Students were provided training in how to use the video editingequipment.For the video laboratory report, students were required to document laboratory testing
Corporate Capitalism, Oxford: Oxford University Press.[3]. Eraut, M. (1994). Developing Professional Knowledge and Competence, London: The Falmer Press.[4]. Beswick, D., Julian, J., and Macmillan, C. [1988], A national Survey of Engineering Students and Graduates, Centre for the Study of Higher Education, University of Melbourne, Australia.[5]. Johnson, P. (chair), (1996), Changing the Culture: Engineering Education into the Future, Barton, ACT : Institution of Engineers, Australia.[6]. Moorehouse, C.E.(1964). “Engineering Courses in Australian Universities”, The Australian University, 2.[7]. Williams, B. Sir (1988), Review of the Discipline of Engineering, Canberra: AGPS.[8]. Finniston, M. Sir (1980), “Engineering Our Future”, Committee of
Engineering, Leuven, Belgium, pp. 173-176.3 Allen, D.T., Murphy, C.F., Allenby, B., & Davidson, C. (2006). Sustainable engineering: A model for engineering education in the twenty-first century? Clean Technology and Environmental Policy 8:70-71.4 Nair, I. (1998). LCA and Green Design: A Context for Teaching Design, Environment and Ethics, Journal of Engineering Education.5 Allen, D., Allenby, B., Bridges, M. et al. (2008). Benchmarking Sustainable Engineering Education: Final Report. Available online: http://www.csengin.org/BSEE_Final_Report_31Dec08_No_Appen_D.pdf6 Kilgore, D., Atman, C.J., Yasuhara, K., Barker, T.J., & Morozov, A. (2007). Considering Context: A Study of First-Year Engineering Students
, ranging from an individualcircuit board for each project block to all blocks on a single board. Teams who selected to createmultiple boards were able to test and troubleshoot circuit problems in a more efficient manner;however each team noted the impracticality of this approach for a final design. Teams with ahigh level of block integration on their circuit boards faced difficulty in testing individual blocksand troubleshooting circuit failures. Group presentations helped to demonstrated the contrast inresults and allowed course instructors to revisit the differences between prototype and finaldesigns which are spanned by the closed-loop, iterative design process. Figures 2a,b – Multiple Block and Single Block PCBs (Team A, C)This
AC 2009-1319: A COMPARISON OF INSTRUCTIONAL DELIVERY METHODSBASED ON STUDENT-EVALUATION DATAJohn Hackworth, Old Dominion University John Hackworth is an associate professor and director of the Electrical Engineering Technology program at Old Dominion University. He holds a B. S. Degree in Electrical Engineering Technology and a Master of Science Degree in Electrical Engineering, both from Old Dominion University. Prior to joining the Old Dominion University faculty, John had approximately 20 years of industrial experience in test engineering and plant automation with General Electric Company. He is the co-author of two textbooks which are currently in use by several electrical engineering
addition, higher levels of retention were seen after pairprogramming was introduced. The instructor intends to continue using pair programming in thiscourse, and will attempt to improve student compliance in alternating roles.Bibliography 1. J. Bevan, L. Werner, C. McDowell, ‘Guidelines For the Use of Pair Programming In a Freshman Programming Class,’ Proceedings of IEEE-CS Conference on Software Engineering and Training, 2002. 2. S. F. Freeman, B. K. Jaeger, J. C. Brougham, ‘Pair Programming: More Learning and Less Anxiety in a First Programming Course,’ Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, June 2003. 3. E. F. Gehringer, ‘Is Pair Programming an Effective Way To Teach Computer Architecture
controllerwith hand-held programmer, limit switches and wiring tools. Students need to design and drawthe ladder logic program with input/output wiring, wire input/output devices to the controller,and enter theprogram into the PLC by HHP and verify the program.Students wire two spring-return switches to the input module of the controller. Use the PowerSupply A to supply a 15V VDC to each switch. The wiring diagram is as below: Figure 4: Input wiring diagramStudents then wire one DC motor to the output module of the controller. Use the 5V VDC powersupply and the Power Supply B to supply a 5V VDC to the two circuits of motor control. Thewiring diagram is as below: Figure 5: Output wiring
Pre-polymer Silicone cover (urethanes), molds, cups, Two polymer wood stirs, souvenirs curative, scissors, plastic bags, stapler. papers, and Plastic bag staples. Top view side view(a) raw materials (b) tools used during production (c) final product descriptions (d) A final product exampleFigure 1. Raw materials, tools used, final product descriptions, and a final productexample for the project.2.1 Production run with the
exercise will be used to help assess ABEToutcome (b) an ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpretdata.12 Therefore, one of the proposed operating scenarios will be chosen so that the students P Pcan implement it and respond to any alarms. After the scenario concludes, the students can usethe event history and historical data to analyze and interpret the data and evaluate theeffectiveness of their experiment.ConclusionAn industrial DCS system was configured and connected to a dynamic process simulationprogram to provide a modern manufacturing environment for PBL educational activities.Modern manufacturing PBL modules including case studies and related scenarios will bedeveloped based on individual course
in non-engineering fields; b) Providing students with necessary software and hardware tools such that they can continue their design project beyond laboratory time limits; c) Encouraging students from different disciplines to interact and collaborate towards an innovative design project; d) Promoting student creativity by asking students to utilize their knowledge and talents in solving a real-world problem.In order to successfully achieve the above objectives, we implemented the followingmethodology. First, we introduce students with the basic concepts in sensor technologies.Then, through demonstration and hands-on experiments, students become familiar withavailable hardware and software tools and their
feedfrom Mogulus and Ustream. These attempted the experiments from a network with abandwidth of 60 kbps and more.54 % were unable to view the live video feed. These attempted the experiments from anetwork with a bandwidth of 15 kbps and less.3. User Experience:a. Lab intuitiveness: Page 14.39.13The average score given by the users for the intuitiveness of the lab (i.e. the experimentclients and the available documentation) was 72.9 %.b. Depth of understanding:From the questions asked the students sequel to their performing the experiments, ouraverage assessment of the depth of their understanding of the concepts being taught,introduced and
yshort A B 50 0.1 0.3 0.4
AC 2009-1247: A MIDDLE-SCHOOL PROJECT FOR SCIENCE AND MATHENHANCEMENT THROUGH ENGINEERINGKaren High, Oklahoma State University KAREN HIGH earned her B.S. from the University of Michigan in 1985 and her M.S. in 1988 and Ph.D. in 1991 from the Pennsylvania State University. Dr. High is an Associate Professor in the School of Chemical Engineering at Oklahoma State University where she has been since 1991. Her main technical research interests are Sustainable Process Design, Industrial Catalysis, and Multicriteria Decision Making. Her engineering education activities include enhancing mathematics, communication skills, critical thinking and creativity in engineering students and teaching science