Bi and Mueller CELT Summer Grant for Instructional Development 1| Page Incorporating product lifecycle concept, rapid prototyping, and certification in a solid modeling course ─ Final Report Zhuming Bi and Donald W. Mueller, Jr. Civil and Mechanical Engineering Indiana University–Purdue University Fort Wayne Fort Wayne, IN 46805 [email protected]; [email protected]1. Overview The goal of this project is to enhance students’ spatial visualization and solid modeling skills through modifications to two courses: ENGR 127 Fundamentals of Engineering I‐Computer Lab and ME 160 Solid Modeling. We have completed multiple activities to help in achieving this goal and made the following changes in existing courses: (1) developed and implemented specially designed activities, quizzes, and homework to improve students’ visualization skills and to help students better transition from 2D drawing with AutoCAD to 3D solid modeling with SolidWorks, (2) introduced the product design lifecycle concept by developing new examples and exercises, using every items, whereby solid models are utilized directly for engineering analysis, motion simulation, mold design, and manufacturing, (3) integrated solid modeling with rapid prototyping by developing new labs and projects using 3D printers, and (4) allowed students to take certified SolidWorks Associate (CSWA) exams and count the test results in their grades. Innovations developed in this project allow students to (a) appreciate the importance of solid models in the entire product design lifecycle; (b) learn to make physical objects via rapid prototyping processes, (c) more effectively use SolidWorks in junior and senior level courses for course projects or senior design projects; (d) gain the formal recognition of their solid modeling skills for career development. Improved solid modeling skills will make students more successful in upper level classes and improve marketability when searching for employment. In addition, the innovations in this proposal will improve students’ spatial visualization skills, which has been shown to be a significant factor in retention and important skill for successful practice of engineering. Methods of evaluation include pre‐ and post‐testing with the Purdue Spatial Visualization Test ‐ Rotations (PSVT:R) (Guay, 1977), testing with certified SolidWorks Associate Exams, and surveying students for achievement of learning outcomes, attitudes, and behaviors. 2. Background EngageEngineering 1 is an initiative funded by the National Science Foundation, whose overarching purpose is to “increase the capacity of engineering schools to retain undergraduate students by facilitating the implementation of three research‐based strategies to improve student day‐to‐day classroom and educational experience.” The three strategies recommended by EngageEngineering include: 1. Improve spatial visualization skills, especially among first‐year students with weak skills. 2. Integrate everyday examples that are familiar to students in first‐ and second‐year courses. 3. Improve and increase level of faculty‐student interaction among 1st & 2nd year students. 1 For more information refer to http://www.engageengineering.org
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Bi and Mueller CELT Summer Grant for Instructional Development
Thegoalofthisprojectistoenhancestudents’spatialvisualizationandsolidmodelingskillsthroughmodificationstotwocourses:ENGR127FundamentalsofEngineeringI‐ComputerLabandME160SolidModeling. Wehavecompletedmultipleactivitiestohelpinachievingthisgoalandmadethefollowingchangesinexistingcourses:(1)developedandimplementedspeciallydesignedactivities,quizzes,andhomeworktoimprovestudents’visualizationskillsandtohelpstudentsbettertransitionfrom2DdrawingwithAutoCADto3DsolidmodelingwithSolidWorks,(2)introducedtheproductdesignlifecycleconceptbydevelopingnewexamplesandexercises,usingeveryitems,wherebysolidmodels are utilized directly for engineering analysis, motion simulation, mold design, andmanufacturing, (3) integratedsolidmodelingwithrapidprototypingbydevelopingnew labsandprojectsusing3Dprinters,and(4)allowedstudentstotakecertifiedSolidWorksAssociate(CSWA)examsandcountthetestresultsintheirgrades.
Innovationsdevelopedinthisprojectallowstudentsto(a)appreciatetheimportanceofsolidmodelsin the entire product design lifecycle; (b) learn to make physical objects via rapid prototypingprocesses,(c)moreeffectivelyuseSolidWorksinjuniorandseniorlevelcoursesforcourseprojectsor senior designprojects; (d) gain the formal recognition of their solidmodeling skills for careerdevelopment. Improved solidmodeling skills will make studentsmore successful in upper levelclassesandimprovemarketabilitywhensearchingforemployment.Inaddition,theinnovationsinthis proposal will improve students’ spatial visualization skills, which has been shown to be asignificantfactorinretentionandimportantskillforsuccessfulpracticeofengineering.
Methods of evaluation include pre‐ and post‐testingwith the Purdue Spatial Visualization Test ‐Rotations(PSVT:R)(Guay,1977),testingwithcertifiedSolidWorksAssociateExams,andsurveyingstudentsforachievementoflearningoutcomes,attitudes,andbehaviors.
2.Background
EngageEngineering1isaninitiativefundedbytheNationalScienceFoundation,whoseoverarchingpurpose is to “increase the capacity of engineering schools to retain undergraduate students byfacilitating the implementation of three research‐based strategies to improve student day‐to‐dayclassroomandeducationalexperience.”ThethreestrategiesrecommendedbyEngageEngineeringinclude:
Numerousstudies(seee.g.referencesonp.15)showthatstrongspatialvisualizationskillsarelinkedto success in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields. Mechanicalengineering students at IPFWdevelop their spatial visualization skills in a two‐course sequenceENGR127–EngineeringFundamentalsI(thecomputerlab)andME160–SolidModeling.Thesetwocourses (see Figure 1) introduce computer‐aided‐drawing (or design) (CAD) using two popular,commercialsoftwarepackages,i.e.AutoCADandSolidWorks.Theskillsintroducedanddevelopedin these two courses areusedbyour students throughout the restof engineering curriculum, inrequired courses, technical elective courses, and senior design projects, aswell as by our co‐opstudentsandeventuallybyourgraduateengineersworkinginlocalindustry.
DevelopmentoftheseactivitieshasbeenguidedandinfluencedbythespatialvisualizationresourcesfromEngageEngineeringandworkbookbySorbyandWysocki(2003).StudentsinENGR127weremadeawareofspatialvisualizationduringthefirstlabperiodwhentheytookthePSVT:R.Throughoutthe semester, lectures were given on multiview projection, pictorial representations, draftingconventions,andsectionsviews.Thenstudentsworkedonvisualizationactivities,usingbothCADaswellaspencilandpaper,thatinvolvesurfaceidentification,constructionofmultiviewdrawingsfromanisometric,creationofmissingviews,constructionofanisometricfrommultiviewdrawings,andcreationofsectioned‐viewsofparts.Solidmodelswereusedtohelpstudentsvisualizecomplexparts.ExamplesofsomeclassroomactivitiesareshowninFigure2,andmanyadditionalactivitiescanbefoundintheworkbookbySorbyandWysocki(2003).
co‐ordinator: Z. Bi
software: SolidWorks
co‐ordinator: D. Mueller
software: AutoCAD
ENGR 127 Engineering
Fundamentals I
ME 160
Solid Modeling
engineering core courses, e.g. ME 361
engineering technical elective courses, e.g. ME 480
Requiringstudents towork thesameproblemsusing to twodifferentapproaches,allows themtocompareandcontrastanddevelopamuchdeeperunderstandingofthedifferentmodelingtechniques.ThisapproachisbasedononeofthecentralimplicationsofGardner’sMultipleIntelligencesTheory,viz.Pluralization.2Pluralizationreferstotheideathatimportantmaterialshouldbetaughtinseveralways.
Thepurposesofcommonactivitiesandexercisesare tocomparetheoutcomesof twocourses interms of the accuracy ofmodels and the productivity of themodelling process. The 2D draftingmethodsand3Dmethodsaretaughtintwodifferentclasses.Threemodelingexercises/quizzeswillbeassignedinbothclassestoevaluatethestudents’performances. ExamplesoftheexercisesaregiveninFigure3.Attheendofthesemester,ananonymoussurveywasgiventoassessstudents’attitudesandopinionsabout2Dand3Dmodelingmethods.
Bi and Mueller CELT Summer Grant for Instructional Development
4 | P a g e
Example Purpose SolidWorks/AutoCAD
1 Use relations and dimensions to reflect the design intents
2
Understand the completeness of solid model (find volume, surface area, and the center gravity with respect to give coordinate system)
3
Use feature‐based modeling and generate 2‐D drawing automatically
Figure3:SampleactivitiescommontoENGR127andME160.
Area=19.57 in2 Volume = 78.28 in3 Surface area = 120.68 in2 Center of gravity: (2.9, 1,54, -2.0)
Bi and Mueller CELT Summer Grant for Instructional Development
5 | P a g e
The lectureonsolidmodels inproduct lifecycleswasenhanced,andanumberofconceptswerecoveredinoneclassmeeting.Thesubjectsinclude(1)theInterfaceofCADtoolswithOtherSoftwareTools, (2) the available tools in SolidWorks for Product Data Management, (3) the basics andprocedureinusingRapidPrototyping,(4)CADmodelingtoolsforCAM,(5)CADmodelingtoolsforprocessplanning.Duringtheclass,everydayitemswereusedtoshowhowsolidmodelsareutilizedforengineeringanalysis,motionsimulation,molddesign,parametricdesign,andmanufacturing
ZhumingBiandDonaldWMuellerJr.(2016)“Integratingeverydayexamplesinmechanicalengineering courses for teaching enhancement,” International Journal of MechanicalEngineeringEducation.DOI:10.1177/0306419015625562.
Overthesummerandfallof2015,anadditivemanufacturinglabwasestablishedinET342.Inthislab,two3Dprintershavebeenplacedforstudentuse.Since3Dprintersdiffer fromconventionalprinters in terms of calibrations, set‐ups, and time of operation, students have to follow theinstructions to use devices adequately. The department hired and assigned a technician (JasonMoyer)whoworkedwithMuellerandBitoestablishpoliciesandprocedurestomanagethelabandschedule time using the printers. The requirements of the ME 160 course projects includedgeneration of one or two parts by 3D printing. Figure 7 shows the two 3D‐printers available tostudents,andFigure8showstwomechanicalengineeringstudentsusingtheprintersandafewofpartsamplesmadebystudentsintheME160classduringthefall2015semester.
Inthissection,wereportsomeofthepreliminaryevaluationsofourworkandgiveapossibleframework,withsomeinstruments,thatmayusefultomorerigorouslystudytheinnovationsdescribedinthereport in the future. Our intention is to involveDr.ScottMoor,Coordinatorof theFirst‐YearEngineeringProgram(affiliatedwiththeDepartmentofElectricalandComputerEngineering)andthe soon‐to‐be‐hired (search is currently underway) counterpart that will be affiliated withDepartmentofCivilandMechanicalEngineeringwiththeseefforts.
Instrument:PSVT:R
ThePurdueSpatialVisualizationTest:Rotation(PSVT:R)consistsof30multiplechoicequestionsthatrequirethetest‐takertomatchrepresentationsofsolidobjectstorotatedversions. (Seee.g.Figure9.)ThePSVT:R is awell‐researched testing instrument firstdeveloped in1977atPurdueUniversity(Guay,1977).Theexamhasbeenusedinhundredsofstudiesandthereisalargeamountofcomparisondata,parsedinmanydifferentways,availableinthepublishedliterature.
Duringthefirstweekofthefall2015semesterthePSVT:Rwasgiventothestudents(N=141)inthecomputerlabofENGR127(allsections,i.e.,sections01‐06)andtothestudents(N=15)inME160.Studentswereinstructedthatthetestwouldnotbeusedforgrading,butwouldbesharedwiththemfortheirownawareness,ifinterested.Inaddition,thescoresmightbeused,onananonymousbasis,to better understand our students’ abilities and improve our programs. After a review of theinstructions,studentsweregiven25minutestocompletethetest.
Bi and Mueller CELT Summer Grant for Instructional Development
8 | P a g e
Figure9.SamplequestioninPSVT:R
TheaveragescoresforeachofthesixsectionsofENGR127andonesectionofME160areshowninFigure10.Inaddition,scoresfromthreeotherengineeringschools(Metzet.al.,2011)areshownforcomparison.TheoverallaveragescoreforstudentsinENGR127was23.6/30or78.8%correct.Theaveragescoreforthe15studentsinME160was24.0/30or80%correct.Thesescorescompareveryfavorablywiththosefromfirst‐yearengineeringstudentsatotheruniversities(Metzet.al.,2011).Note:Accordingtotheliterature,scoreshaveshowntoimprovebasedonlevelintheengineeringprogram, i.e. sophomore, junior or senior compared to first‐year, and average male scores aretypicallyhigherthanaveragefemalescores.ManydifferentvariableshavebeenshowntohaveaneffectonthePSVT:Rscores.
Bi and Mueller CELT Summer Grant for Instructional Development
9 | P a g e
A closer look at the data for the ENGR 127 students reveals interesting results. The literatureindicatesthatascorebelow20/30(or67%)ontheexamindicatesaspatialvisualizationweaknessthat can be improved. In many studies, an intensive, “short‐course” was given to improve thestudents’spatialvisualizationabilities(e.g.seetheworkofSorby),whileinothercasesimprovementstrategies were incorporated into an existing course (Dong, 2012). (Note: In some studies thedemarcationbetweenacceptable andweaknesswas set at18/30or60%;weused the cut‐offof20/30.)Outofthe141first‐yearengineeringstudentstested,24studentsor17.0%scoredbelow20onthetest,while117or83.0%scored20orabove.TheseresultsaresummarizedinTable1.
Table1:DistributionofENGR127studentscores
N %
Number of scores below 20 24 17.0%
Number of scores 20 or above 117 83.0%
141 100%
AcloserlookatthescoresfortheME160studentsalsoshowsinterestingresults.Figure11showsthe scores for each question and the distribution of the individual scores. Improved spatialvisualizationskillsamongME160students(comparedtoENGR127)isexpectedbecauseME160studentshavesomeCADexperienceandscoreshavebeenshowntoincreaseasastudentprogressesinanengineeringprogram.
Duringthefirstweekofthespringsemester2016,thePSVT:Rwasgiventothestudents(N=24)inME160.Studentswereinstructedthatthetestwouldnotbeusedforgrading,butwouldbesharedwith them for their own awareness, if interested. In addition, the scoresmight be used, on ananonymousbasis,tobetterunderstandourstudents’abilitiesandimproveourprograms. Afterareviewoftheinstructions,studentsweregiven25minutestocompletethetest.
Overall average improvement of repeat test takerswas 1.94,with the average improvement forstudentswithinstructorA=1.11andtheaverageimprovementinstructorB=2.88.Fivestudentshadlowerscoresontheretake.ItisinterestingtonotethatInstructorAhasnottaughtaCADclassbefore and did not havemuch experiencewith CAD software. Instructor B has taughtmultiple
24.026.1
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
fall 2015 spring 2016
average number correct
‐6
‐4
‐2
0
2
4
6
8
10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
increase in PSV
T‐R score
ME 160 student
instructor Binstructor A
Bi and Mueller CELT Summer Grant for Instructional Development
Duringthelastweekofclassesinthefall2015semester,ananonymoussurveywasgiventofirst‐year engineering students (N=56) in three sectionsofENGR127 lab. The surveywasvoluntary,administeredwhiletheinstructorwasnotintheroom,andcollectedbyastudent.Thissurveywasadministered in a manner similar to our standard assessment procedures. Results were notexamineduntilafterfinalgradesforthefallsemesterweresubmitted.Thepurposeofthesurveywastwo‐fold:
2. To ascertainhowmuch first‐year engineering students are utilizing resources forhelp intheirclasses.
Table2showsthestudentsattitudesandopinionsconcerningmultiviewdrawingandAutoCAD.Thedata in Table 2 reveals that students believe that they can create multiview drawings and feelcomfortableusingAutoCAD.
A secondpurposeof the surveywas todeterminehowmany studentswere taking advantageofuniversity‐providedacademicresources.Table3showthepercentageofENGR127studentswhotookadvantageofsometypeofuniversity‐providedacademicresource—themajorityofthestudents(59%)tookadvantageofsomekindofhelp.Thetypeofresourceandthenumberofvisitswasalsoatopicofthesurvey.AsshowninTable4,thetypeofhelpusedbymoststudentswasinstructorofficehours,andmoststudentsusetheresourcesmorethanonce.Notethatthepercentagesdonotaddto100%asstudentsmayhaveusedmultipleresources.
Center for Academic Support and Achievement (CASA‐TutorTrac) 13 13/33 = 39%
Studentswerealsoasked if theydidnotuseacertainresourcetocircle thereasonwhynot: notaware,notneeded,notime.Themostpopularanswerwasnotneeded,byalargemargin,followedbynotime.Itappearsthatmoststudentsareatleastawareofthehelpresourcesthatareavailableoncampus.
Instrument:CSWAexam
Inthefall2015,13ME160studentstooktheCSWAaspartoftheirfinalexam.Figure14showsthepercentageofscoresinfivecategoriesincluding‘basicpartmodeling’,‘intermediatepartmodelling’,‘advancedpartmodeling’,‘draftingtheory’,and‘assemblymodeling’.Duetotheintroductionofsolidmodelling in product design; students understand better about the applications; thus, achievingbetterscoresinthecategoriesof ‘assemblymodeling’and‘advancedpartmodelling’.Theaveragepercentofscoresis74.5%andthepassrateis9outof13,i.e.,70%successrate.
Wedesigned a survey to collect the responses from students about the improvementswemadethroughthisSIDproject.Table5showsthefivequestionsinthesurveyandFigure15showstheaverages.
0
20
40
60
80
100
Bi and Mueller CELT Summer Grant for Instructional Development
In comparison with your previous experience in learning a computer‐aided design tool (e.g. AUTOCAD), how do you rate your experience in ME‐160 solid modeling course? Please comment on the most significant things you learn in ME‐160?
2.
I expanded the introduction on how to use Solid Models for engineering analysis; for example, using motion simulation, conducting stress analysis, and creating molds for parts. Do you think these introductions increased your interest in using SolidWorks to support your junior or senior level mechanical courses?
3. I assigned the course project for you to reverse engineering everyday example products and rapid‐prototype sample parts from 3D printing. Do you think this project and 3D printing is a good learning experience for you?
4. I adopted Certificate SolidWorks Associate (CSWA) in the grading system to measure your skills in solid modelling. Do you think CSWA could be helpful to increase your confidence level of solid modeling and grow your career development?
5. We are making our efforts to make a continuous improvement semester by semester. What are the most significant changes you would suggest?
Note: students are asked to (1) give their ranking as ‘excellent’, ‘good’, ‘fair’, and ‘poor’ and (2) provide the comments to support or explain their ranking.
2. We developed the module “solid models in product life cycles” in ME 160 using everydayexamplesofengineeringitemswhenpossible.ThismaterialisavailabletootherinstructorsofME160touseastheywish.
3. Weusedadditivemanufacturing (3Dprinting) inME160projects. Asof fall2015, the lab isfunctioningwithpoliciesandproceduresestablishedfor3Dprinting.Otherinstructorsmayusethisfacilityastheywish.
The innovations from this project have resulted in new course materials being developed andexisting course material being refined as well as new evaluation methods being proposed andimplemented,atleastonapilotbasis.
Developedanadvisingworksheet(seeAppendixA)thatcanusedtohelpmakestudentsawareof a spatial visualizationweaknesses, potential for improvements, andpossible resources forhelp.
Documented, in a published journalarticle, examples of how to useeverydayexamplesinasolidmodelingcourse.
Our intention is for thiswork to continue,andpossiblyexpand,underthedirectionofDr. Scott Moor, Coordinator of the First‐Year Engineering Program (affiliatedwiththeDepartmentofElectricalandComputerEngineering) and the soon‐to‐be‐hired(searchiscurrentlyunderway)counterpartwhowill be affiliatedwith Department ofCivilandMechanicalEngineering.
Figure16.Studentsusingthenew3Dprintinglab.
Bi and Mueller CELT Summer Grant for Instructional Development
15 | P a g e
References3
Dong, Y., (2012). Lessons learned in engaging engineering students by improving their spatialvisualizationskills.AmericanSocietyofEngineeringEducationAnnualConference,AC2012‐2981.ENGAGEStrategyResearchBrief:SpatialVisualizationSkills.Retrievedfromhttp://www.wepanknowledgecenter.org/c/document_library/get_file?folderId=237&name=DLFE‐1076.pdfGimmestad,B.J.(1990).Genderdifferencesinspatialvisualizationandpredictorsofsuccessinanengineeringdesigncourse.ProceedingsoftheNationalConferenceonWomeninMathematicsandtheSciences,St.Cloud,MN,133‐136.Guay,R.B.(1977).PurdueSpatialVisualizationTest:Rotations.WestLafayette,IN:PurdueResearchFoundation.SusanStaffinMetz,SherylA.Sorby,TriciaS.Berry,Dr.CarolynConnerSeepersad,AnaMariaDison,YosefS.Allam,JohnAMerrill,WallyPeters,EricaPfister‐Altschul,GuangmingZhang,JamesA.Leach,(2011). ImplementingEngageStrategies to improve retention: focuson spatial skills‐engineeringschools discuss successes and challenges. American Society of Engineering Education AnnualConference,AC2011‐438.Sorby,S.A.,&Baartmans,B.J.(2000).Thedevelopmentandassessmentofacourseforenhancingthe3Dspatialvisualizationskillsoffirstyearengineeringstudents.JournalofEngineeringEducation,(89)3,301–7.SorbyS.A.andWysocki,A.F.(2003).Introductionto3‐DSpatialVisualization:AnActiveApproach.ThomsonDelmarLearning,CliftonPark,NewYork.Sorby,S.A.(2009).Educationalresearchindeveloping3‐Dspatialskillsforengineeringstudents.InternationalJournalofScienceEducation,31(3).Sorby,S.A.,(2011,January27).ENGAGEwebinar:Improvingspatialvisualizationskills.Retrievedfromhttp://www.engageengineering.org/?page=26.Sorby,S.A.(2011)DevelopingSpatialThinking.CengageBrain.comUttal,D.H.,Meadow,N.G.,Tipton,E.,Hand,L.L.,Alden,A.R.,Warren,C.,&Newcombe,N.S.(2012,June4).TheMalleabilityofSpatialSkills:AMeta‐AnalysisofTrainingStudies.PsychologicalBulletin.Advanceonlinepublication.doi:10.1037/a0028446Wai,J.,Lubinski,D.,Benbow,C.P.(2009).SpatialAbilityforSTEMDomains:AligningOver50YearsofCumulativePsychologicalKnowledgeSolidifiesItsImportance.JournalofEducationalPsychology,Vol101,No.4,818‐835.