ENKÄTER

 

Utvärderingar

Aktuella utvärderingar
Administrera
Hjälpsida

Visa resultat

Här kan se resultatet från utvärderingen och exportera statistiken till ett annat program. Det går också att göra en enkel filtrering genom att klicka på svarsalternativen och kommentarerna eller en avancerad filtrering genom att använda knappen längst ned.


Engineering Design and Optimization, PPU190

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2014-01-08 - 2014-02-15
Antal svar: 19
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 54%
Kontaktperson: Mikael Enelund»
Utbildningsprogram som genomför enkäten: Maskinteknik 300 hp
Utbildningsprogram studenten tillhör: Maskinteknik 300 hp

1. Which masters programme in mechanical engineering are you currently enrolled in?

19 svarande

Applied Mechanics»4 21%
Automotive Engineering»7 36%
Product Development»8 42%
Another programme»0 0%
Erasmus»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.21

2. How many hours per week did you spend on this course?

We mean total time, that is, it comprises the time you spent in class and the time you spent on your own work. Try to estimate the average time over the entire study period.

19 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»2 10%
Around 20 hours/week»8 42%
Around 25 hours/week»6 31%
Around 30 hours/week»3 15%
At least 35 hours/week»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.52

- The work load was high compared to other courses, but manageable.» (Around 25 hours/week)


Course aim and learning objectives

3. To which extent do you consider that the course reaches its aim?

The course aims at integrating traditional design methodologies with concepts and techniques of modern optimization theory and practice. With the approach and instilled knowledge the students are expected to be able to create design solutions that are creative and have better performance compared to traditional conservative methods

19 svarande

Not at all»0 0%
To some extent»2 10%
Satisfactorily»7 36%
To a large extent»6 31%
Perfectly»4 21%

Genomsnitt: 3.63

- More optimization and problem solving with this. Less "engineering design" which is trying to fit everything into one course» (To some extent)
- In my mind, there is no such thing as perfect, but the home assignements with a competition side were very motivating and made me to work hard with new optimization tools.» (To a large extent)

4. How do you rate your ability to master the complete development chain including modeling-analyses-test-evaluation?

Please comment how the Engineering Design and Optimization course has contributed to this ability. Comment also if you lack a specific part of the chain.

19 svarande

Not at all»0 0%
Partially»2 10%
Most of it»12 63%
Fully»5 26%

Genomsnitt: 3.15

- The feeling I got from the class was that I still have alot to learn, but I can also already contribute to a pretty sophisticated development process. I felt that I have made a good start in becoming a high level engineer.» (Partially)
- Matlab was difficult. » (Most of it)
- This was known before the course» (Fully)

5. How well do you perceive that you have developed the knowledge, understanding and skills that are stated in the course learning outcomes

How do you rate ability to.....

Matrisfråga

- Note that this is how I rate my skill level AFTER taking the course. Most of these abilities were substantially lower before.»

Identify areas for improvement in a new or an existing product design.
19 svarande

1 (Poor)»0 0%
2 10%
5 26%
11 57%
5 (Expert)»1 5%

Genomsnitt: 3.57

Identify and choose appropriate material alternatives for a product.
19 svarande

1 (Poor)»0 0%
1 5%
8 42%
8 42%
5 (Expert)»2 10%

Genomsnitt: 3.57

Apply previously-learned design methods and tools to practical problems.
19 svarande

1 (Poor)»0 0%
0 0%
4 21%
10 52%
5 (Expert)»5 26%

Genomsnitt: 4.05

Create appropriate simulation models of the design problem.
19 svarande

1 (Poor)»0 0%
2 10%
7 36%
9 47%
5 (Expert)»1 5%

Genomsnitt: 3.47

Use Computer Aided Engineering (CAE) tools to design and simulate product performance.
18 svarande

1 (Poor)»0 0%
2 11%
3 16%
8 44%
5 (Expert)»5 27%

Genomsnitt: 3.88

Formulate design optimization problems based on project or product requirements.
19 svarande

1 (Poor)»0 0%
1 5%
4 21%
11 57%
5 (Expert)»3 15%

Genomsnitt: 3.84

Apply numerical optimization techniques and computer tools to solve optimization problems.
18 svarande

1 (Poor)»0 0%
4 22%
3 16%
7 38%
5 (Expert)»4 22%

Genomsnitt: 3.61

Interpret optimization results for design decision making (e.g., material choice, geometry, manufacturing, production).
19 svarande

1 (Poor)»0 0%
1 5%
7 36%
9 47%
5 (Expert)»2 10%

Genomsnitt: 3.63

Create CAE drawings for use with three-dimensional printing tools.
19 svarande

1 (Poor)»1 5%
1 5%
4 21%
6 31%
5 (Expert)»7 36%

Genomsnitt: 3.89

Iterate on design solutions to continually improve a product.
19 svarande

1 (Poor)»0 0%
2 10%
4 21%
9 47%
5 (Expert)»4 21%

Genomsnitt: 3.78

Communicate design solutions, including rationales for a given choice, advantages, and disadvantages over alternatives.
19 svarande

1 (Poor)»0 0%
0 0%
9 47%
8 42%
5 (Expert)»2 10%

Genomsnitt: 3.63

6. Are the learning objectives reasonable considering your background and the number of credits?

19 svarande

No, the objectives are set too low»2 10%
Yes, the objections are reasonable»15 78%
No, the objectives are set too high»2 10%

Genomsnitt: 2

7. Did the examination (midterm, final exam and projects) assess whether you have reached the objectives?

19 svarande

No, not at all»1 5%
To some extent»9 47%
Yes, definitely»9 47%

Genomsnitt: 2.42

- There were some things that were not practiced or explained to full extent in lectures, but were still in exam and mid-term. For example, the dervation of sensitivity.» (To some extent)

8. Do you appreiciate this form of continuous examination?

with midterm, project assignments and final exam that all contribute to the final grade. Please comment on the weight to the final grade of the different assessments.

19 svarande

No, not at all»0 0%
Somewhat»1 5%
Yes»6 31%
Yes definetely»12 63%

Genomsnitt: 3.57

- Continiuos examination is keeping the motivation up.» (Yes definetely)

9. Do your course grade (Fail, 3, 4, 5) reflect your knowledge in your opinion?

19 svarande

Small extent»2 10%
Some extent»7 36%
Large extent»10 52%

Genomsnitt: 2.42

- Too easy to get good grades, particularly low demands on the projects» (Small extent)
- I got a 5 so I must be an expert.» (Large extent)


Teaching and Content

10. In your opinion, what course content would have been valuable to have spent more time on?

Rangordningsfråga. Siffran anger medelposition.

1.Structural optimization2.4
2.Training of CAE-tools2.8
3.Optimization theory3
4.Product design3.7
5.Material selection3.8
6.Sustainability and Robust design4.7

- Robustness of design (optimization) important, but sustainability did not fit well with the course. » (?)
- - Would be good to have some class excersises about optimization theory and how to calculate with it. -Would be good to have the information about topology optimization a little bit earlier. » (?)
- Product design as esthetics would be a subject of another class in my mind.» (?)

11. Relevance to sustainablility

Matrisfråga

To what extent do you perceive that sustainablity aspects were included in course content?
18 svarande

1 (Very low)»0 0%
4 22%
9 50%
4 22%
5 (Very high)»1 5%

Genomsnitt: 3.11

To what extent have you developed competences and skills that you believe are important for developing sustainable products and systems in your future career?
17 svarande

1 (Very low)»1 5%
2 11%
7 41%
6 35%
5 (Very high)»1 5%

Genomsnitt: 3.23

12. To what extent has the teaching been of help for your learning?

19 svarande

Small extent»1 5%
Some extent»3 15%
Large extent»10 52%
Great extent»5 26%

Genomsnitt: 3

- It was of good help but because of the large amount of information a lot is forgotten and extensive self studies has to be done to even remember some. » (Some extent)
- Steven and Evertsson» (Large extent)
- The lectures was exceptional» (Great extent)

13. How were the opportunities for asking questions and getting help?

19 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Rather poor»0 0%
Rather good»5 26%
Very good»14 73%
I did not seek help»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.73

- Teachers were very helpfull if you went to their offica and asked. » (Very good)

14. How well has cooperation between you and your fellow students worked?

19 svarande

Very poorly»0 0%
Rather poorly»1 5%
Rather well»3 15%
Very well»15 78%
I did not seek cooperation»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.73

- Group tasks were a lot of fun.» (Very well)

15. How was the balance between lectures, project work, workshops and guest lectures?

19 svarande

Poor balance»1 5%
Balance was acceptable»6 31%
Good balance»12 63%

Genomsnitt: 2.57 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

16. In your opinion, what teaching/learning acitivty would have been valuable to have spent more time on?

Rangordningsfråga. Siffran anger medelposition.

1.Problem solving exercises2.1
2.Workshop/Tutorials3.2
3.Supervised project sessions3.3
4.Project work3.5
5.Lectures3.8
6.Guest lectures4.8

- MATLAB workshops with problem solving was a very good complement to the lectures» (?)
- actually, I feel that the project tasks were too big for the given amount of time and credits. Think that the project (especually project 2) should be smaller. the Workshops were many but also very good. » (?)

17. What is your impression of the Project assignment 1 (Cantilever Challange)?

19 svarande

Very valuable»10 52%
Valuable»8 42%
Of minor value»1 5%
Unnecessary»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1.52

- Good, but could have been allocated less time» (Valuable)
- Nice to learn some new CAE tools. But would be even more valuable if you used some CAD integrated optimization tool (for example Ansys Opt tool). That lecture/info came too late. » (Valuable)
- Fun to try "real deal", however competition event rather lengthy. Mre complex gemetry, better CAE trainging.» (Of minor value)

18. What is your impression of the Project assignment 2 (Materials selection and design optimization)?

19 svarande

Very valuable»6 31%
Valuable»9 47%
Of minor value»4 21%
Unnecessary»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1.89

- More time would be good, more project proposals and with more known parameters of current solutions (materials in particular)» (Valuable)
- Learning Ansys, good. Much more clear assignmnet descritpion needed.» (Valuable)
- Too big project and also hard to apply the mathematical optimization theory fully, due to complex product geometry. » (Valuable)
- A lot of time had to be spent on this project, more than project 1 and 3 together, and it gives less credits than the other two.» (Of minor value)
- Second assignement was a dit vague.» (Of minor value)

19. What is your impression of the Project assignment 3 (Adams multi-body dynamic optimization)?

19 svarande

Very valuable»6 31%
Valuable»9 47%
Of minor value»4 21%
Unnecessary»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 1.89

- really nice to get in contact with a new and very valuable software. Also liked the idea with A3 reports. » (Very valuable)
- Better tutorials!!!» (Very valuable)
- Presenation in minor groups very lenghy and unstructured.» (Valuable)
- Adams was a very good tool to get to know. Vehicle dynamics are hard!» (Valuable)
- Mostly a ADAMS tutorial, only good for learning ADAMS, but not any knowledge towards optimization. Would be better to stick with one commercial CAE which is more known such as ANSYS. » (Of minor value)
Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 2.57


Summarizing questions

20. Do you think the course outcome will help you in your future career as automitive engineer/product developer/CAE engineer?

19 svarande

Not at all»0 0%
To a little extent»1 5%
To some extent»7 38%
To a large extent»10 55%
No opinion»1

Genomsnitt: 3.5

- Have got an overview of some really useful CAE tools and opportunities.» (To a large extent)

21. Did you interact or work together with students from another masters programme or specialization than your own?

19 svarande

Yes»16 84%
No»3 15%

Genomsnitt: 1.15

22. In commercial product development projects, it is customary to work in cross-disciplinary teams with engineers with different specialist competences. To what extent was this reflected in the course?

19 svarande

Very low»1 5%
Low»1 5%
Moderate»14 73%
High»3 15%

Genomsnitt: 3

- We were just two students in each group so I dont think it reflected the reality so much, but sure to some extent. » (Moderate)
- This is hard to do at school. We would need advanced theoretical lectures corresponding to our own specialaty and practical assignments together.» (Moderate)

23. What is your general impression of the course?

19 svarande

Poor»1 5%
Fair»0 0%
Adequate»2 10%
Good»8 42%
Excellent»8 42%

Genomsnitt: 4.15

- Very good intention, but contents should be more focused and demands higher. » (Adequate)
- Overall the course was very interesting and is a course I recomend other to take. But because all the different subjects it gets a bit messy.» (Good)
- Really nice with all of the workshops and CAE tools. » (Good)
- Excellent course with a lot of material that was totally new to me.» (Excellent)
- This is by far the most useful course I have taken at Chalmers. When I signed up for the course I was not quite sure what to expect, but I am so glad that I did. This course has given me valuable knowledge about evaluating designs in so many different ways than I would have thought optimization applied to. Before taking this course I did not know exactly where optimization applied, but now I see how it can be used in ALL of my other coursework, for one thing or another. Last study period I also took Materials Selection and Design because I thought this course would go more in depth into the materials aspect of optimization. I was very unhappy after completing that course to find out that the entire study period of that course was basically covered in the first 3-4 weeks of Engineering Design and Optimization. The EDO course largely makes the Materials Selection and Design course obsolete. It took an extremely marginal effort on my part to get a 5 in the Materials course after having taken EDO. The ability to understand objective functions and constraints has opened my eyes to many new possibilities for engineering. I have just started with my thesis project at Volvo where we are tasked with solving a complex function with 120 different coefficients to a set of measured data (with lots of noise) from a vehicle. Many of these coefficients have upper and lower bounds, and there are several constraint functions that need to be evaluated. Traditional Matlab fit functions were not working at all (only finding local minima, resulting in horrible correlation), but because of my knowledge of optimization I was able to implement a genetic algorithm solver that has been producing surprisingly good results (much better than what was thought possible in the outline of the thesis). The information that I learned from the EDO class will be used throughout my career as an engineer, this I am sure of.» (Excellent)

24. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- More theory and application of optimization techiques. Less reverse engineering, fatigue, sustainability, product development cycle etc. »
- Structure is needed! Fatigue lecture and material lectures somewhat not as focused to optimizaion. More desctioptin of the dfferent topics(Mostly for fatigue)»
- I think that some of the product development parts might be excluded on the exam and that the exam should focus on optimization. the repetition of product development was however very useful and could still be included in the course and maybe on the midterm. further work on post-processing of data from optimization calculations could be required for the assignments in my opinion.»
- The timing of the ADAMS tutorials and I think it could the third assignment should be streamlined a bit.»
- more structure in the workshops more time for assignments»
- Maybe take some subjects away and focus more on a smaller amount. Problem solving sessions is needed. The 14 credit problem at the exam was surprising because we havnt done very much of these problems and it was very much more complicated than the ones we done. »
- Make project 2 smaller or give it more credits. have practical optimization exercises.»
- Time alloted of project assignments should be increased.»
- Better matlab lectures»
- The amount of work was too much, too high workload»

25. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- Lectures on optimization, projects (though with higher demands and only one commercial software)»
- Steven»
- the cantilever challenge was thought through and developing for me and i think it should be kept. also the rigid body dynamics assignment should be kept in my opinion.»
- The first assignment, it was very challenging and rewarding.»
- the first assignment and the competition»
- Projects in general very good. But they took to much time, there wasnt much time to study for exam until the third project was handed in, about 4 days before exam. 4 days not enough for this. »
- All the workshops and the variety of different CAE tools.»
- Interaction between Steven/Johannes and the class was an invaluable part of this course. The willingness to engage the students and have actually discussion in the lectures is something that is largely missing from almost all the other courses I have taken at Chalmers. This added greatly to my understanding of key components of the course, and made it easier for everyone to speak up and ask questions when they were unsure of something.»
- assignment 1, cantilever challenge. »
- The projects»
- Focos on optimization tools and software»

26. Additional comments

- Glad that I took the course. »

Genomsnitt totalt för alla frågor: 2.57
Beräknat jämförelseindex: 0.78


Kursutvärderingssystem från