Roger Mayne Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering University at Buffalo State University of New York Application of Continuous Improvement to an Undergraduate.
Post on 21-Dec-2015
219 Views
Preview:
Transcript
Roger Mayne
Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering
University at BuffaloState University of New York
Application of Continuous Improvement to an Undergraduate
Mechanical Engineering Program
Summary
• About UB and ME at UB• Current BSME program• Accreditation in the U.S.• Continuous improvement approach• Surveying students and alumni• Program revision• Follow on survey results
• Industry problems for design projects
Background Information
UB is part of the State University of New York
(4 university campuses, 20 colleges)
An suburban campus of about 24,000 students
Wide range of undergraduate programs, full graduate spectrum - medicine, law, etc.
Engineering school offers BS, MS and PhD programs in Aerospace, Chemical, Civil, Computer, Electrical, Industrial and Mechanical Engineering
The Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Department22 - 25 faculty members
Research in materials, mechanics, fluid-thermal sciences, design, system dynamics
Graduating 120 - 150 BS students per year
35 - 50 MS students and 8 - 12 PhDs
20 - 25 percent of our students are pursuing Aerospace degrees or dual degrees
Basic BSME Program• Relatively typical BSME• Math (4 courses)• Physics, chemistry (4 courses)• Engineering fundamentals (7 courses)
– drawing, programming, thermo, statics, dynamics, strength, EE concepts
• Mechanical engineering (9 courses)– instrumentation, dynamic systems, fluids,
heat transfer, machines, mechanisms, materials, materials II, thermo II
Basic Program (cont.)
• Design (2 courses)– design process, senior design
• Laboratories (5 courses)– instrumentation, 2 materials, fluids/heat,
systems• Electives (6 courses)
– three technical, two applied math, one free• General education (8 courses)
– 2 english, 6 social science
A Few Semesters First Year (Freshman)
Fall SpringChemistry 1 4 Calculus 2 4Calculus 1 4 Physics 1 4Intro. Engineering 3 Intro. Drawing 2English 1 3 English 2 3Gen Ed 1 3 Gen Ed 2 3
17 16
Fourth Year (Senior)
Fall SpringThermo 2 3 Senior Design 4
Machines 2 3 App Math 2 3 Design Proc 2 TE 3 3TE 1 3 Gen Ed 6 3TE 2 3 Free Elective 3Gen Ed 5 3 16
17Total 134
Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology
• Known as “ABET”• Federation of thirty one engineering and
technical societies - including ASME, IEEE, ASCE, SME, AIChE, ASEE, etc.
• Accredits over 2400 programs in engineering and technology at more than 500 colleges and universities across the U.S.
Comments on Accreditation
• For students– an accredited degree is the first step
toward becoming a registered professional engineer
• For engineering programs– validates the quality of the program for
university administration and government– an important factor in recruiting new
students
ABET 2000
• Major change in philosophy in the 1990’s• Accreditation had led to over specification • US engineering programs were becoming
very similar• ABET 2000 based on objectives, outcomes
and assessment• Our interpretation of the original ABET 2000
is the basis for this talk• ABET is now on a new highly (excessively?)
controlled path
Basic Strategy
• Faculty define goals• Develop knowledge and skill statements• Obtain feedback on appropriateness of
knowledge and skill statements• Survey for importance of particular
knowledge and skill items• Use focus groups for clarification• Continually improve program
Highlights of the Knowledge Statement
• Mathematics/sciences
• Mechanics
• Materials science
• Thermodynamics
• Heat transfer
• Fluid mechanics
• System dynamics
• Machines/mechanisms
• Design
• Manufacturing
• Numerical computations
• Exposure to practice
• Professionalism, ethics, society, environment
Highlights of the Skills Statement
• Product design and realization
• Math modeling• CAD modeling and
tools• Sound engineering
judgement
• Choose and evaluate materials
• Choose and evaluate manufacturing processes
• Communication skills• Ability to work in teams
The Initial Survey• Graduating seniors
– Classes of 1999 and 2000 (~60% response)• Alumni
– Classes of 1994 - 1998 (~20 % overall response)
• Comments requested on goals• Knowledge and skills rated by
– Importance to career (Scale of 1- 5)– Importance given at UB (Scale of 1- 5)
0 1 2 3 4 5
Thermodynamics
Fluid Mechanics
Heat Transfer
Numerical Comps.
System Dynamics
Materials Science
Sciences
Manufacturing
Prof./Eth./Soc./Env.
Mathematics
Machines & Mechs.
Mechanics
Design
Exposure to Practice
0 1 2 3 4 5
Prof./Eth./Soc./Env.
Manufacturing
Exposure to Practice
Design
System Dynamics
Fluid Mechanics
Numerical Comps.
Thermodynamics
Heat Transfer
Materials Science
Sciences
Machines & Mechs.
Mechanics
Mathematics
Manufacturing
Exp to PracticeDesign
MechanicsMach & Mechs
MathPro/Eth/So/EnManufacturing
SciencesMatls Science
Heat Transfer
System Dyn
Fluid Mech
Num Comps
Thermo
Exp to PracticeDesign
MechanicsMach & Mechs
Math
Pro/Eth/So/En
SciencesMatls Science
Heat Transfer
System DynFluid Mech
Num CompsThermo
ME Career Importance UB Importance
Knowledge Survey ResultsGraduating Seniors (1999 and 2000)
To Simplify
The term “Shortfall” is used to combine the two importance measures where (for example):
Knowledge shortfall (percent) =
UB Importance
ME Importance - UB Importance100 X
0 25 50 75 100
Thermodynamics
Heat Transfer
Sciences
Mathematics
Fluid Mechanics
MaterialsScience
Num. Comps.
Mechanics
Machines/Mechs.
Sys. Dynamics
Design
Manufacturing
Prof//Eth/Soc/Env
Exp. to Practice
(Imp - UB Imp)/UB Imp
Knowledge Shortfall - Percent
Knowledge Survey ResultsGraduating Seniors (1999 and 2000)
Knowledge Survey ResultsAlumni (1994 – 1998)
-25 0 25 50 75 100
Thermodynamics
Num. Comps.
Sciences
Mathematics
Fluid Mechanics
Heat Transfer
Sys. Dynamics
Mechanics
MaterialsScience
Machines/Mechs.
Prof//Eth/Soc/Env
Design
Manufacturing
Exp. to Practice
Knowledge Shortfall - Percent
(Imp - UB Imp)/UB Imp
Skill Survey ResultsGraduating Seniors (1999 and 2000)
0 25 50 75
Math Modeling
Choose/Eval. Materials
Ability to Work in Teams
Product Design and Realization
Judg. for Eng. Decisions
CAD Modeling and Tools
Choose/Eval. Mfg. Processes
Communication Skills
(Imp - UB Imp)/UB Imp
Skill Shortfall - Percent
Distributions
• Well behaved• No signs of bimodal distributions• Examples from the Alumni survey
follow
CAD Tools and Modeling
0
20
40
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
Choose and Evaluate Manufacturing
Processes
0
20
40
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
Math Modeling
0
20
40
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
Skill Survey
Alumni (1994 - 1998)
Typical Shortfall Histograms
Survey Conclusions
• Graduating seniors and alumni generally agree• Traditional knowledge areas reasonably covered• Weaknesses in
– exposure to practice, manufacturing– design, prof/ethics/env/society
• More focus on skills, especially– communications skills– CAD, manufacturing processes
Changes to the Program (2001)
• Introductory Drawing & CAD (Year 1)– Now offered directly by MAE and no longer shared
• Introduction to ME Practice (Year 2)– New course: design projects, reverse engineering,
communication• Manufacturing Processes (Year 3)
– Traditional course in manufacturing • Design using CAD (Year 3)
– Mechanical design projects using AutoCad and ProE• Design Processes (Year 4)
– Original course is expanded• Senior Design (Year 4)
– Course revised and reorganized
Changes to the Program (cont.)
• Formerly required, now electives– Thermodynamics II– Machines and Mechanisms II– Materials II– Materials II Lab
Survey History To Date
• Graduating seniors (Classes of 1999 and 2000)• Alumni of 1994 - 1998(conducted in 2000)
Surveys before program revision
• Graduating seniors (Classes of 2001 thru 2007)• Alumni of 2000 – 2004 (conducted in 2006)
Continuing surveys since revision
Career Importance Plots
0
1
2
3
4
5
Exp
. to
Pra
ctic
e
De
sig
n
Me
cha
nic
s
Ma
chin
es/
Me
chs.
Ma
the
ma
tics
Pro
f//E
th/S
oc/
En
v
Ma
nu
fact
uri
ng
Sci
en
ces
Ma
teri
als
Sci
en
ce
Sys
. D
yna
mic
s
Nu
m.
Co
mp
s.
He
at
Tra
nsf
er
Flu
id M
ech
an
ics
Th
erm
od
yna
mic
s
1999/2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
0
1
2
3
4
5
Ab
ility to
Wo
rk in
Te
am
s
Ju
dg
. fo
r E
ng
.
De
cis
ion
s
Co
mm
un
ica
tio
n
Skills
Pro
du
ct D
esig
n
an
d R
ea
liza
tio
n
CA
D M
od
elin
g
an
d T
oo
ls
Ch
oo
se
/Eva
l.
Ma
teri
als
Ch
oo
se
/Eva
l.
Mfg
. P
roce
sse
s
Ma
th M
od
elin
g
1999/2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
Knowledge Career Importance
Skill Career Importance
UB Program Importance
0
1
2
3
4
5
Math
em
atic
s
Mechanic
s
Machin
es/M
echs.
Scie
nces
Mate
rials
Scie
nce
Heat T
ransfe
r
Therm
odynam
ics
Num
. C
om
ps.
Flu
id M
echanic
s
Sys. D
ynam
ics
Desig
n
Exp. to
Pra
ctic
e
Manufa
ctu
ring
Pro
f//E
th/S
oc/E
nv
1999/2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
Knowledge UB Importance
0
1
2
3
4
5
Ability t
o W
ork
in T
eam
s
Math
Modelin
g
Judg.
for
Eng.
Decis
ions
Choose/E
val.
Mate
rials
Pro
duct
Desig
n
and R
ealization
Com
munic
ation
Skills
CA
D M
odeling
and T
ools
Choose/E
val.
Mfg
.
Pro
cesses
1999/2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
Skill UB Importance
-25
0
25
50
75
100
Exp
. to
Pra
ctic
e
Pro
f//E
th/S
oc/E
nv
Man
ufac
turin
g
Des
ign
Sys
. D
ynam
ics
Mac
hine
s/M
echs
.
Mec
hani
cs
Num
. C
omps
.
Mat
eria
lsS
cien
ce
Flu
id M
echa
nics
Mat
hem
atic
s
Sci
ence
s
Hea
t T
rans
fer
The
rmod
ynam
ics
Knowledge Shortfall
Seniors 1999 vs Seniors 2007
-25
0
25
50
75
100
Co
mm
un
ica
tion
Ski
lls
Ch
oo
se/E
val.
Mfg
. Pro
cess
es
CA
D M
od
elin
ga
nd
To
ols
Jud
g. f
or
En
g.
De
cisi
on
s
Pro
du
ct D
esi
gn
an
d R
ea
liza
tion
Ab
ility
to W
ork
inT
ea
ms
Ch
oo
se/E
val.
Ma
teri
als
Ma
th M
od
elin
g
Skill Shortfall
Seniors 1999 vs Seniors 2007
-25
0
25
50
75
100
Com
mun
icat
ion
Ski
lls
Cho
ose/
Eva
l.M
fg.
Pro
cess
es
CA
D M
odel
ing
and
Too
ls
Judg
. fo
r E
ng.
Dec
isio
ns
Pro
duct
Des
ign
and
Rea
lizat
ion
Abi
lity
to W
ork
in T
eam
s
Cho
ose/
Eva
l.M
ater
ials
Mat
h M
odel
ing
Skill Shortfall
Alumni 94-98 vs Alumni 00-04
-25
0
25
50
75
100
Exp
. to
Pra
ctic
e
Pro
f//E
th/S
oc/E
nv
Man
ufac
turin
g
Des
ign
Sys
. D
ynam
ics
Mac
hine
s/M
echs
.
Mec
hani
cs
Num
. C
omps
.
Mat
eria
lsS
cien
ce
Flu
id M
echa
nics
Mat
hem
atic
s
Sci
ence
s
Hea
t T
rans
fer
The
rmod
ynam
ics
Knowledge Shortfall
Alumni 94-98 vs Alumni 00-04
Overall Survey Conclusions
• Career Importance surveys show consistency from year to year
• UB Importance surveys reflect the targeted program changes
• Short Fall results since revision show improved– Design, manufacturing, CAD– Practice, professionalism, judgement
• Short Fall results since revision show little effect on traditional technical and science topics
Senior Design Course
• One semester course• Students work in groups of two or three• Projects mostly from industry• Wide range of topics• Many projects are assigned to more than one
group to provide competition
Course Deliverables
• Initial project description including task assignments and schedule
• Weekly oral progress reports• Midterm oral presentation to tutorial section• Midterm written report• Final oral presentation to tutorial section • Presentation to the sponsor (with competing group)• Final written report
Course Structure• Lecture and tutorials• Lectures meet only occasionally • Tutorials meet weekly for about one hour• Four to six groups are in each tutorial• Student groups describe their weekly progress in
the tutorial sections• Students meet with sponsors periodically and
make Email contacts as necessary
Typical Projects
• Babcock and Wilcox (boiler design and manufacture)– Design of a “flue” to handle boiler exhaust
gases– Design of a support system for a boiler
“header” pipe– Mechanical load, high temperature and thermal
expansion are major concerns
Roller Stresses
Typical Projects
• Moog Inc. (design and manufacture of hydraulic actuators and controls)– Design of a wire retaining system for the end
cap of a hydraulic cylinder– Primary issue is stress in the cylinder groove
supporting the wire retainer– Light weight is a primary consideration
Geometry
Example FEM Results
Typical Projects
• Calspan Corp. (contract research and development company)– Redesign of a tire testing machine for use at
higher speeds– Concerns include steel belt during testing– Protection of components from water bearing
discharge– Natural frequencies of excitation– Specification of strain gage locations for force
sensing
Tire Tester
Force Sensing
Right Web – FEM Analysis
Full Balance – FEM Analysis
Typical Projects
• Nuttall Gear (design and manufacture of drives and gears for process applications)– Redesign of a gear drive system– Gear wear and noise are issues– Identified shaft deflection and natural
frequencies as major concerns– Use of existing parts highly desired
Gear Box Installation
Typical Projects
• Rich Products (major manufacturer of non-dairy “cream” products)– Design/selection of production facility for
packing millions of containers of “whip topping”
– Production speed, possible package redesign are major considerations
– Payback period of replacement system important
Whip Topping Product
Included in Solution
• Need TwoTwo machines• Output:
50-60 bags per minute50-60 bags per minute
• Machine cost: $400,000- $450,000
• Size:4.1m X 2.3m X 1.9m
• Lead time5 months
Conclusions…
• ABET 2000 has provided motivation to reconsider our program
• We tried to use it in updating our curriculum on a customer oriented basis
• Quantitative surveys effective in understanding student needs and overcoming faculty inertia
• Industrial design projects are important for providing experience and developing skills
top related