Visa resultat

Introduction to Automotive Engineering 2007, TME120

Your own effort

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

58 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»		13		22%
Around 20 hours/week»		21		36%
Around 25 hours/week»		15		25%
Around 30 hours/week»		7		12%
At least 35 hours/week»		2		3%

Genomsnitt: 2.37

- just ok» (Around 20 hours/week)
- It depends of the week. I had weeks with I spent more than 20 and I had weeks with less hours» (Around 20 hours/week)
- a very vast course. not properly guided where to focus.» (Around 30 hours/week)
- i just come to gothenburg for a couple of weeks,then it started this course.it takes a long time for me to follow the lecture of each, and i need to take more progress to understand the powerpoint in the class every evening.» (Around 30 hours/week)

2. How large part of the teaching offered did you attend?

58 svarande

0%»		0		0%
25%»		1		1%
50%»		3		5%
75%»		21		36%
100%»		33		56%

Genomsnitt: 4.48

- I went to all classe I was able to.» (75%)
- actually just near 100%, but we dont consider percentage between 90% and 100%.» (75%)
- too many guest lecturers» (100%)
- it"s good to have this kind of teaching, we can get a chance to see what is going on in reality not just the things in book.» (100%)
- 90-100%» (100%)
- pretty good that it covers a broad view of the whole automotive engineering field» (100%)
- i do not want to lose any lecture.so i am not only take it, but record it and review it after class.» (100%)

Goals and goal fulfilment

3. How understandable are the course goals?

I have not seen/read the goals»		7		12%
The goals are difficult to understand»		2		3%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»		28		48%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»		21		36%

Genomsnitt: 3.08

- because i havnt looked for them» (I have not seen/read the goals)
- Hard to relate the goals to the lectures,» (The goals are difficult to understand)
- I had problems to understand what is the most important part of each chapter» (The goals are difficult to understand)
- the goals should be more focussed as the subject is too vast.» (The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer)
- Most of guest speakers are from companies, so their way of talking are quite different from the teachers, so we have to adapt to this kind of teaching.» (The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer)
- all of the lectures and materials are about introdution.i want to learn something deeper.» (The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer)

4. Are the goals reasonable considering your background and the number of credits?

50 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»		2		4%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»		46		92%
No, the goals are set too high»		2		4%

Genomsnitt: 2

- in fact its difficult to say if it is too low or too high, its just somehow aside respect and background.» (No, the goals are set too low)
- goals r ok but not properly communicated» (Yes, the goals seem reasonable)
- we do not need to change the lecturer every time, we only need to learn something deeper for some special parts, such as the compnent of a vehicle. we do not need to know the noise,homologation and something like that.» (No, the goals are set too high)
- Our background is Indutstrial Design, it"s hard to understand some knowledge related with engineering.» (No, the goals are set too high)

5. Did the examination assess whether you have reached the goals?

No, not at all»		0		0%
To some extent»		28		52%
Yes, definitely»		22		41%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»		3		5%

Genomsnitt: 2.52

- too long exam and too many questions for such a course. every question says to describe or explain and there is no time to do all this in 4 hrs.» (To some extent)
- Too many questions on the exam. It was not time enough to answer them all» (To some extent)
- To many questions on the exam.» (To some extent)
- A bit to many questions on the exam» (To some extent)
- The exam was a disaster! You can"t have an exam with 17 questions, with a-d subquestions! The time ran out very quickly, it would have been enough with half of the questions! I strongly question the examination form. Wouldn"t it be enough with assignments, maybe extend them a little and perhaps a presentation of them. It just felt like the examinator tried to put EVERYTHING in the exam that was presented in the course, and that is really not possible...» (To some extent)
- to much out of range,and it is quite difficult and impossible for me to read all the pages of the book and understand it, then describe it.it is too hard.» (To some extent)
- I thought the exam was to big. It was to much questions which made it very hard to them all during the exame time. I think it should changed for next year to make it less stressful.» (Yes, definitely)
- the exam itself was a bit too big. perhaps the assignment questions were a bit unnecessary since it had already been answered by handing in the reports.» (Yes, definitely)
- but the questions seem too much for us.» (Yes, definitely)
- It was to my oppinion a to large exam taking to many areas into account. This lead that some or many did not have time to answer all questions. My proposal is either to reduce the number of questions or extend the time of the exam to 5-6 hours.» (Yes, definitely)
- It was too large! The content was good but I could not answer the questions because of the lack of time!» (Yes, definitely)

Lectures, visits, teaching and course administration

6. What did you think of the lectures listed below?*

Matrisfråga

- The tyre part was not that easy to understand, it could have been performed better by the lecturer. Road Vehicle Aerodynamics was just a lot of pictures, it would be nice to know where the main part of the drag comes from in a road vehicle, lifting forces is not that relevant outside the racing track. The lecture with the 2 million ways of mapping and engine was way to quick and too advanced, but the message was clear anyway. Sven is really good and I really appreciated the lecture with Steve from Lotus.»
- too many guest lecturers and some of the lectures were like advertising campaigns boosting about themselves and their products. tyres class has the slides which doesnt explain anything. internet is a better option than this class tough tyres is very important aspect in the course not much is said about it.»
- The precentation by Bengt Jacobson was not that good. It was a very intresting and difficult topic, and he was diffilcult to learn from It was too many hours in a row with Steve Williams. More than two hours with the same teacher is too much.»
- One thing that the teachers should do is to think about what they want to tell during their class, in alot of cases they told alot of stuf but didnt manage to give a message, I felt I didnt get anything out of some of the classes. »
- The two marked with wer bad are marked so because I wasn"t there!!»
- Bad questions: A well needed lecture is not equal to that it is well performed!»
- Definetly the worst lectures i"ve ever attended. Guest lecturers are not good at teaching! Impossible to know whats important and whats off topic, presentations about their companies is not relevant for the course. Malin should point out whats relevant or something during the lectures or have the lectures herself! The slides ain"t appropriate as course material, they dont give any info, eg check the aerodynamics slides, just pics of cars!»
- I haven"t learn much things on the "control system" course as the teacher taught too quickly...»
- i only need to know the out part of a vehicle, so the inner part i do not need to care about it.»
- a few sessions for example session on tires, like i couldn"t follow what he was talking about, i am not sure if it is because i was sitting at the last or some wrong with the lecturer»
- Supplier role in Automotive Product Development - Hans Rössle - Supplier categories and reasons to outsource* : 1/3 of the slides were advertisement for the society, it is far too much»
- should need a box for didn"t attend.»
- i have to answer questions on lectures i didnt even attend or i cant submit the evaluation!! - this definetly should be changed»

Automotive Vehicles - Malin Kjellberg*
58 svarande

Very bad - don»		1		1%
Bad - To some extent relevant for the overall topic»		1		1%
OK - needed and well performed»		21		36%
Good - well needed and interesting»		24		41%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»		11		18%

Genomsnitt: 3.74 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

Engine Characterisitcs and Design - Sven Andersson*
58 svarande

Very bad - don»		0		0%
Bad - To some extent relevant for the overall topic»		0		0%
OK - needed and well performed»		11		18%
Good - well needed and interesting»		28		48%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»		19		32%

Genomsnitt: 4.13 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

Powertrain and Longitudinal Control - Beng Jacobsson*
58 svarande

Very bad - don»		4		6%
Bad - To some extent relevant for the overall topic»		7		12%
OK - needed and well performed»		23		39%
Good - well needed and interesting»		18		31%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»		6		10%

Genomsnitt: 3.25 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

Braking Systems - Magnus Evertsson*
58 svarande

Very bad - don»		0		0%
Bad - To some extent relevant for the overall topic»		2		3%
OK - needed and well performed»		19		32%
Good - well needed and interesting»		26		44%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»		11		18%

Genomsnitt: 3.79 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

Tyres - Mats Beckman*
58 svarande

Very bad - don»		3		5%
Bad - To some extent relevant for the overall topic»		17		29%
OK - needed and well performed»		27		46%
Good - well needed and interesting»		5		8%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»		6		10%

Genomsnitt: 2.89 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

Design Management and process at Volvo Cars - Thomas Bergqvist*
58 svarande

Very bad - don»		3		5%
Bad - To some extent relevant for the overall topic»		10		17%
OK - needed and well performed»		22		37%
Good - well needed and interesting»		14		24%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»		9		15%

Genomsnitt: 3.27 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

Supplier role in Automotive Product Development - Hans Rössle - Supplier categories and reasons to outsource*
58 svarande

Very bad - don»		2		3%
Bad - To some extent relevant for the overall topic»		5		8%
OK - needed and well performed»		18		31%
Good - well needed and interesting»		23		39%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»		10		17%

Genomsnitt: 3.58 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

Supplier role in Automotive Product Development - Hans Rössle - Product development process, an overview*
58 svarande

Very bad - don»		3		5%
Bad - To some extent relevant for the overall topic»		5		8%
OK - needed and well performed»		15		25%
Good - well needed and interesting»		26		44%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»		9		15%

Genomsnitt: 3.56 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

Suspensions, components and geometry - Malin Kjellberg*
58 svarande

Very bad - don»		0		0%
Bad - To some extent relevant for the overall topic»		3		5%
OK - needed and well performed»		16		27%
Good - well needed and interesting»		34		58%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»		5		8%

Genomsnitt: 3.7 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

Vehicle Dynamics, Suspensions and SHARK - Steve Williams*
58 svarande

Very bad - don»		0		0%
Bad - To some extent relevant for the overall topic»		5		8%
OK - needed and well performed»		13		22%
Good - well needed and interesting»		22		37%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»		18		31%

Genomsnitt: 3.91 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

Noise, Vibration and Harshness - Wolfgang Kropp*
58 svarande

Very bad - don»		1		1%
Bad - To some extent relevant for the overall topic»		8		13%
OK - needed and well performed»		29		50%
Good - well needed and interesting»		18		31%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»		2		3%

Genomsnitt: 3.2 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

Road Vehicle Aerodynamics - Lennart Löfdahl*
58 svarande

Very bad - don»		1		1%
Bad - To some extent relevant for the overall topic»		6		10%
OK - needed and well performed»		18		31%
Good - well needed and interesting»		28		48%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»		5		8%

Genomsnitt: 3.51 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

Active Safety and Vehicle Dynamics - Johan Hultén*
58 svarande

Very bad - don»		0		0%
Bad - To some extent relevant for the overall topic»		4		6%
OK - needed and well performed»		18		31%
Good - well needed and interesting»		26		44%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»		10		17%

Genomsnitt: 3.72 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

Materials in Vehicle Production - Pål Schmidt*
58 svarande

Very bad - don»		5		8%
Bad - To some extent relevant for the overall topic»		11		18%
OK - needed and well performed»		24		41%
Good - well needed and interesting»		18		31%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.94 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

Safety - Mats Svensson*
58 svarande

Very bad - don»		2		3%
Bad - To some extent relevant for the overall topic»		4		6%
OK - needed and well performed»		23		39%
Good - well needed and interesting»		25		43%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»		4		6%

Genomsnitt: 3.43 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

Safety / Crashworthiness - Yngve Håland*
58 svarande

Very bad - don»		1		1%
Bad - To some extent relevant for the overall topic»		1		1%
OK - needed and well performed»		22		37%
Good - well needed and interesting»		26		44%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»		8		13%

Genomsnitt: 3.67 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

Control Systems - Bo Egardt*
58 svarande

Very bad - don»		5		8%
Bad - To some extent relevant for the overall topic»		15		25%
OK - needed and well performed»		29		50%
Good - well needed and interesting»		6		10%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»		3		5%

Genomsnitt: 2.77 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

Vehicle Development and Certification - Nitin Patel & Edtih Dahlqvist*
58 svarande

Very bad - don»		3		5%
Bad - To some extent relevant for the overall topic»		15		25%
OK - needed and well performed»		28		48%
Good - well needed and interesting»		11		18%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»		1		1%

Genomsnitt: 2.86 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

Global trends in AE Industry - SvenåkeBergelie*
58 svarande

Very bad - don»		1		1%
Bad - To some extent relevant for the overall topic»		6		10%
OK - needed and well performed»		32		55%
Good - well needed and interesting»		16		27%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»		3		5%

Genomsnitt: 3.24 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

7. What did you think of the company visits to*

- Both were good, bad though we did´,nt get to see the crash test center, that would have been really interesting, but we are going there anyway in the crash safety course, so that´,s ok!»
- everything is kept secret and cannot properly view the process and the questions were not answered well. a big time waste»
- johnson control - a bit hard to hear everything, otherwise good volvo - in i opinion the main point was to see the safety centre»
- The presentation in the production was not too good planed.»
- Was missing the other visit,and coud be more interesting if we could visit as well some part of design proccess»
- Did not attend on either - BAD that this is a mandetory question!»
- DIDN"T VISIT!!, didn"t see any point in them, wanted to visit safety center but that was cancelled»
- The guided tour at Johnson was kind of a disappointment. the guide was no good, she didn"t really know what she talked about, she was talking with her back againsst the audience...and so on. The trip to VCC Torslanda was really good, but it had been more fun if we had went to the safety center as well.»
- it would be perfect if we visited the safety center.»
- hope next time i can visit more about volvo cars but not cancel it.»
- Didnt attend due to cut down visit and needed to attend another course instead»
- Volvo it was a short visit. or else i hope it would be really good.»
- Assembly Plant seemed to be more for tourists than engineers»
- Did not attend to Volvo visit»
- I didn"t go to Johnson controls. For Volvo, it was too quick, we couldn"t ask any question»
- The trip was too short in VOLVO»
- I missed to visit the part of safety in volvo»
- the same as in 6 - i didnt take part in both visits, just one - still i have to answer it»

Johnson Controls - Arendal*
58 svarande

Very poor»		2		3%
Rather poor»		6		10%
OK»		21		36%
Rather good»		21		36%
Very good»		8		13%

Genomsnitt: 3.46 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

Volvo Cars Torslanda Assembly Plant*
58 svarande

Very poor»		1		1%
Rather poor»		12		20%
OK»		21		36%
Rather good»		15		25%
Very good»		9		15%

Genomsnitt: 3.32 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

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

Small extent»		2		3%
Some extent»		16		27%
Large extent»		36		62%
Great extent»		4		6%

Genomsnitt: 2.72

- The inputs from students, I think will improve if inputs from teaching staff can be increased just a little.» (Some extent)
- the teachers are really kind for all lectures.» (Large extent)

9. To what extent has the the course literature and other material been of help for your learning?

Small extent»		7		12%
Some extent»		23		39%
Large extent»		21		36%
Great extent»		7		12%

Genomsnitt: 2.48

- The book is not good...» (Small extent)
- The course book isn"t too bad, the slides are a joke. Wikipedia has supplied me more info than the slides.» (Some extent)
- too much pages and really hard to find out it.» (Some extent)
- but the book was really to no help in my opinion.» (Large extent)

10. How well did the course administration, web page, handouts etc work?

Very badly»		1		1%
Rather badly»		5		8%
Rather well»		33		56%
Very well»		19		32%

Genomsnitt: 3.2

- Reading instructions that late is NOT OK!» (Very badly)
- Late reading instructions and assignments.» (Rather badly)
- Frequent and short-timed changes of rooms» (Rather badly)
- in due time, missed the pages we were to read» (Rather well)
- The web page was very up to date.» (Rather well)
- Malin probably has too much going on, so things tend to be delayed, she has to prioritize the course more.» (Rather well)
- some of them are useful, such as supplier role and tyre.some of them are just the introduction do not contain any knowledge, such as homologation,material and trend.» (Rather well)
- just , some of the notices (new) were so sudden that many time I couldn see coz cas done one night before» (Very well)
Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 3.43

Study climate

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

Very poor»		2		3%
Rather poor»		3		5%
Rather good»		20		34%
Very good»		30		51%
I did not seek help»		3		5%

Genomsnitt: 3.5

- too many students and the it was crowded. very disturbing.» (Very poor)
- To heavy loads on the teachers.And In that case, the questions and the tasks should be better or more extensively formulated. » (Rather poor)
- Since Malin wasn"t the one giving the lectures, there was very poor communication» (Rather poor)
- every lecturers are so kind and glad to solve the questions we have.» (Rather good)
- There were occansional problems with getting help for assignment three since they were situated at Linholmen.» (Rather good)

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

Very poorly»		1		1%
Rather poorly»		3		5%
Rather well»		23		40%
Very well»		30		52%
I did not seek cooperation»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 3.43

- Utbytesstudenterna, speciellt fransmännen pratar under föreläsningarna, väldigt störande om man sitter nära. Dessutom kommer det alltid 10 studenter sent typ 15min-30min.» (Rather poorly)
- we worked together from 9am to 9pm for our assignment and discuss the result of the calculation.it is quite good.everyone have different background and can exchange to each other.» (Very well)

13. How was the course workload?

Too low»		0		0%
Low»		5		8%
Adequate»		35		60%
High»		17		29%
Too high»		1		1%

Genomsnitt: 3.24

- Because I knew the subject from before...» (Low)
- A little too much regarding the assignments because we didnt have the proper preknowledge» (Adequate)
- 3 assignments and exams is a lot of work as the course has been covering a lot of subject and u can never call it as an introduction course.» (High)
- well because i was preparing with the book rather than with the slides, so it was high for me.» (High)
- i need to review the lectures after each one, read the handouts and book for at least 4 hours each.» (Too high)

14. How was the total workload this study period?

Too low»		0		0%
Low»		3		5%
Adequate»		30		51%
High»		20		34%
Too high»		5		8%

Genomsnitt: 3.46

- Because I knew the subjects from before...» (Low)
- There was a lot of writing in all reports, but lucky for us, the assignments were not that heavy, but they gave a good basic understanding.» (Adequate)
- Enough time to both make good assignments and to study.» (Adequate)
- 2 courses and that too including introduction is too much» (High)
- this course have so many classes every week.the load is so heavy.» (Too high)

Summarizing questions

15. What is your general impression of the course?

Poor»		2		3%
Fair»		8		13%
Adequate»		16		27%
Good»		29		50%
Excellent»		3		5%

Genomsnitt: 3.39

- not useful for my major.» (Poor)
- it is a good course overall but many developments are needed.» (Fair)
- Due to some uninspired teachers not knowing what to teach the class» (Fair)
- since poor is a too picky word» (Fair)
- Don"t know if I have any use of all this curiose facts I learned in this course.» (Fair)
- Coming from a non-automobile background, i am now comprehensively aware of the various aspects and confident to a certain level.» (Good)
- it covers the introduction of all the important areas» (Good)
- But can be more focussed» (Good)
- - in general improve assignment quality» (Good)

16. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

17. What should definitely be changed to next year?

18. Additional comments

* obligatoriska frågor