Aktuella utvärderingar

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.

Internal Combustion Engines, Advanced Course, 2009, MTF 225

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2009-06-04 - 2009-06-28
Antal svar: 24
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: ?%
Kontaktperson: Petter Dahlander»
Utbildningsprogram som genomför enkäten: Chalmers
Utbildningsprogram studenten tillhör: Maskinteknik 300 hp

Course Administration and information

1. Were the goals of the course clear after reading the course PM and the information on the course web page?

24 svarande

Not good»0 0%
Poor»1 4%
Ok»8 33%
Good»14 58%
Very good»1 4%

Genomsnitt: 3.62

2. Was the web page satisfactory?

24 svarande

Not good»0 0%
Poor»0 0%
Ok»4 16%
Good»16 66%
Very good»4 16%

Genomsnitt: 4

- More suggested reading could be uploaded.» (Ok)
- short and concise» (Good)

3. Was the course PM satisfactory?

24 svarande

Not good»0 0%
Poor»0 0%
Ok»8 33%
Good»11 45%
Very good»5 20%

Genomsnitt: 3.87

- But not better...» (Ok)


4. Were the goals of the course fulfilled?

24 svarande

No»0 0%
Almost»6 25%
Yes»18 75%

Genomsnitt: 2.75

- But there could have been more engines in the course» (Yes)

5. Do you consider that you had good enough pre-knowledge?

24 svarande

Not at all. I missed a lot»3 12%
Yes»9 37%
Yes. Definitely»12 50%

Genomsnitt: 2.37

- because, it was my first courses in Internal combustion engine» (Not at all. I missed a lot)
- I did not have any background (no lecture about ICE in my school), so it was a very hard task to understand the course.» (Not at all. I missed a lot)
- Yes, but I have to say that I"m an Erasmus student, and I already attended a pre-course in my own country» (Yes. Definitely)

6. Which parts of the course were difficult and which parts were easy?

- It wasn"t that hard. »
- optical measurement technics were abit difficult to get a grip around»
- Actually, the parts talking about engines were quiet easy to understand. Regarding the optical measurement methods, diagnostic and so on, that was a bit more difficult but the visit at the lab helped to understand.»
- The difficult part was to understand some of the slides, for example the optical mesurement slides. But it"s good at the same time that it"s hard because then you have to make some research on the side. Understand all the different parameters and how they influence performance in the engine is the most difficult thing with the course I think. The easiest parts are all the basic facts, like the fuel slides.»
- Task were very difficult because courses and tasks didn"t coincide.»
- Nothing to say: we had to face with all typical engineering problems, so there were not difficult/easier parts.»
- hard: accoustic and how to optimize the volumetric efficiency, optical measurements nothing easy for me»
- Some overlap with the intro to ICE course last term. »
- everything was fine»
- It was difficult to grasp the lectures about optical measurements as well as the some stuff in the CFD lecture.»
- svårt att koppla helheten ibörjan. men efter assignment 2 så klarnade det...»
- Optical measurements and when GT-Power didn"t do what we wanted.»
- CFD lectures were difficult, »

7. Is it clear what your knowledge from the course can be used for?

24 svarande

No»1 4%
Almost»3 12%
Yes»20 83%

Genomsnitt: 2.79

- Probably to make engine related experiments and development» (Yes)

8. Do you consider the course to be scheduled right in time in the global course plan?

23 svarande

Yes»18 78%
No. Too early»2 8%
No. Too late»3 13%

Genomsnitt: 1.34

- Well, it"s not a problem, but ICE is in lp1, and this course is in lp4.» (No. Too late)
- skall nog komma direkt efter grundkursen. bra att kunna motorer...» (No. Too late)

9. Did you find the “,suggested readings”, questions uploaded to the web page helpful?

24 svarande

Yes»23 95%
No»1 4%

Genomsnitt: 1.04

- THe information was clear and easy to follow» (Yes)
- The questions uploaded on the portal were definetly useful» (Yes)
- But, I took questions from the previous year, which just as well could have been posted this year. I think that was a bit strange.» (Yes)
- some points could have been explained to understand the textbook and the slides» (Yes)
- Mycket bra! kan nästan utöka dom ännu mera. » (Yes)
- But there should have been more!!! Now there were only for a couple of subjects.» (Yes)


10. What do you think about the lectures as a whole?

24 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Poor»2 8%
Ok»8 33%
Good»8 33%
Very good»6 25%

Genomsnitt: 3.75

- Interesting» (Very good)
- The lectures by Petter and Ingemar was very good. The others as well but especially these.» (Very good)

11. How many lectures did you go to? (%)

24 svarande

0-20 %»1 4%
20-40 %»1 4%
40-60 %»6 25%
60-80 %»4 16%
80-100 %»12 50%

Genomsnitt: 4.04

12. If you did not go to the lectures, what was the reason?

- early morning lectures»
- Mostly skipped them for formula student.»
- Unfortunatly not really insterested in some lecture topics.»
- too early, good weather»
- Early morning lectures»
- overlaping»
- Var tvungen att jobba...»
- Formula student.»
- overlap with other lecture»

13. How did you like Petter Dahlander’,s lectures?

(Engine modeling, Sprays, Introduction to Computational Fluid Dynamics, Gasoline Direct Injection)

23 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Poor»0 0%
Ok»4 17%
Good»13 56%
Very good»6 26%

Genomsnitt: 4.08

- Interesting lectures and teacher» (Good)
- Especially the GDI lectures were interesting because he seem to know alot» (Very good)
- Very pedagogic and engaging.» (Very good)

14. How did you like Ingemar Denbratt’,s lectures?

(Gas Exchange, Charge motion, Alternative fuels, Engine operating characteristics, Development trends CI+SI)

24 svarande

Very poor»1 4%
Poor»1 4%
Ok»6 25%
Good»7 29%
Very good»9 37%

Genomsnitt: 3.91

- lite ostrukturerad. lite för stressad. dåliga handouts...Jätte duktig på det han pratar om!» (Poor)
- Maybe with more examples to illustrate and to understand how to use this theory could have been interesting to show during the lectures» (Ok)
- Good to have some future thoughts as well!» (Very good)
- Maybe a bit fast though, would have been nice with more time.» (Very good)

15. How did you like Mats Andersson’,s lectures?

(Optical measurement methods)

20 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Poor»1 5%
Ok»10 50%
Good»7 35%
Very good»2 10%

Genomsnitt: 3.5

- Where not there.» (?)
- A little bit difficult to understand what we should use the lecture for before the lab visit.» (Ok)
- Too many slides with lot of information. Should be reduced so it would be easier to follow.» (Ok)
- Good but it"s quite difficult to understand these things when you"ve never heard about them beforehand. It would be good to study some of the techniqes used before the lecture.» (Good)
- Interesting lectures and teacher» (Good)

16. How did you like Sven Andersson’,s lectures?

(Diesel Spray Combustion)

23 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Poor»0 0%
Ok»5 21%
Good»12 52%
Very good»6 26%

Genomsnitt: 4.04

- Well performed but not so charasmatic» (Ok)
- I put ok since I think that the subject is covered in other parts of the course. Nice though with movies and to see the real parts used in an engine. Alright, I will change to good then. » (Good)
- very interesting lectures and teacher» (Very good)

17. How did you like Anders Karlsson’,s lectures?

(CFD in industry)

19 svarande

Very poor»1 5%
Poor»1 5%
Ok»8 42%
Good»6 31%
Very good»3 15%

Genomsnitt: 3.47

- Didn"t give me anything.» (Poor)
- Not enough engines in the lecture» (Ok)
- Not very interesting for me because I already knew everything from the RVAD course. The lecture by Petter was much better.» (Ok)
- Interesting lectures» (Good)

Design Task (Computer Exercises)

18. What did you think about the design tasks as a whole?

24 svarande

Very poor»1 4%
Poor»0 0%
Ok»2 8%
Good»9 37%
Very good»12 50%

Genomsnitt: 4.29

- Useful. A little too time-consuming, but it"s just my feeling.» (Good)
- Really good to use a program like GT-Suite, which is used in the industry.» (Good)
- Interesting to get a feeling in how and what to tune in engines» (Very good)
- Design task 2 was one of the most interesting tasks I"ve done on Chalmers. The software is tricky to understand to start with, but after that you realize that you can do so many things with it. I learned alot and it was fun.» (Very good)
- I did not know anything about airflow but the first task helped me to understand, also thanks to my partner. The second task was very interesting to understand how to optimize the vol eff. The software is hard to understand how to use it.» (Very good)
- It was very helpful to get an better understanding in gas exchange» (Very good)

19. How many GT-Power exercises did you go to? (%)

24 svarande

0-20 %»0 0%
20-40 %»3 12%
40-60 %»3 12%
60-80 %»7 29%
80-100 %»11 45%

Genomsnitt: 4.08

- The second design task was finished before the end of the exercise sessions so I didn"t attend the 3 or 4 last ones.» (60-80 %)
- We spend more hours with GT-Power then it was scheduele for.» (60-80 %)

20. What did you think of GT-Power software?

24 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Poor»0 0%
Ok»3 12%
Good»14 58%
Very good»7 29%

Genomsnitt: 4.16

- hard to understand and use to optimize the engine» (Good)
- Easy to use and to learn. Compared to AVLBoost it is way better.» (Very good)
- Easy to handle and seem to work faultlessly» (Very good)
- As I said, tough learning curve but it"s a very good software. I"m also glad that Volvo use this software.» (Very good)

21. What did you think about Daniel Dahl"s supervision?

24 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Poor»0 0%
Ok»2 8%
Good»10 41%
Very good»12 50%

Genomsnitt: 4.41

- Very helpful and easy to talk to» (Good)
- Always answered questions!» (Good)
- Always very helpful and engaged in the students. Easy to talk to.» (Very good)
- helpful» (Very good)
- Snyggaste killen! Pöss (Du e störst)» (Very good)
- he always took time to answer questions also besides the lectures» (Very good)

22. What did you think about Jonas Wärnberg"s supervision?

24 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Poor»0 0%
Ok»3 12%
Good»10 41%
Very good»11 45%

Genomsnitt: 4.33

- Always answered questions!» (Good)
- Perfect» (Very good)
- Always more than helpful and brings answers to all weird questions that we came up with.» (Very good)
- helpful» (Very good)

Engine Laboration

23. What did you think about the engine laboration?

24 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Poor»2 8%
Ok»9 37%
Good»7 29%
Very good»6 25%

Genomsnitt: 3.7

- Engine did not work. Could not complete the engine laboratory as a result.» (Poor)
- The lab was too much, look here and write here. Maybe not so much understanding.» (Ok)
- The engine laboration in itself was very good. However, the moment when we were getting the answers to the questions, I didn"t understand that much.» (Good)
- Mycket bra. dock även här för låga krav. tycker man skall skriva en kort rapport och besvara frågorna!» (Good)
- Good to have something to touch» (Very good)
- A very good and "hands-on" laboration!» (Very good)

Course Literature

24. What did you think about the Heywood book?

23 svarande

Very poor»1 4%
Poor»2 8%
Ok»5 21%
Good»8 34%
Very good»7 30%

Genomsnitt: 3.78

- Because, I find that it"s stupid of reading a book entirely (which is expensive). I consider that the teacher has to read the book and who has to summarize any important information by chapters (for example by making a handout). The book could be interesting for people who are really interesting by the Internal combustion Engine, but after the courses and not during the courses.» (Poor)
- Too old. And at the same time too time consuming to be understood completely in a reasonable time.» (Poor)
- dags att uppdatera den dock...Det står inget om tumble i den. det behövs litteratur som beskriver detta bättre och jämför med de andra charge motions...» (Ok)
- A good book but maybe to many equations i nsome chapters» (Good)
- hard to understand, maybe because of my english skills» (Good)
- in some areas not up to date, it would be good to have more additional information in certain areas like cfd. additional lecture handouts from Ingemar Denbratt were very helpful » (Good)
- It"s the bible, everything is here, if you have the strength to read it. It would be nice though with some complement for new tehnologies and understanding the concepts. Text and graphs isn"t always the best way to understand how engines work.» (Very good)

25. What did you think about the lecture handouts?

24 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Poor»2 8%
Ok»3 12%
Good»16 66%
Very good»3 12%

Genomsnitt: 3.83

- blandat. vissa vara bra. andra fanns överhuvudtaget inte. » (Poor)
- Denbrats was really good.» (Good)
- Except for Optical measurements, those slides could be made to understand » (Very good)

Your work

26. How many hours per week did you spend for this course?

(Total work including home work)

22 svarande

< 15 h»5 22%
Ca 20 h»6 27%
Ca 25 h»6 27%
Ca 30 h»5 22%
> 35 h»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.5

- I don"t know. But most of the time spent were on the assignmnets, which were very good!» (?)
- Mostly with GT-Power» (Ca 25 h)

The Exam

27. What about the exam?

24 svarande

It was too easy.»0 0%
It was ok.»23 95%
It was too difficult.»1 4%

Genomsnitt: 2.04

- A bit of surprise but a good way to show what you have learned» (It was ok.)
- It was good since it wasn"t only just facts, but also some questions where you had to understand how engines work, i.e. the question with 1 vs 2 cylinders.» (It was ok.)
- I would prefer something more based on the optimization and functionning» (It was ok.)
- I think it would be better to grade the assignments and final presentaiton as well and take that into account for the final grade» (It was ok.)


28. What did you think about the course as a whole?

24 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Poor»0 0%
Ok»7 29%
Good»12 50%
Very good»5 20%

Genomsnitt: 3.91

- The only problem was that it should have been more negine tech. for example vibrations...» (Good)
- Interesting content. But there was a lack of connection to activities in industry. There were many details (such as tuning, CFD techniques, etc) that could only be loosely described in the course lectures by saying "BMW is doing this, for example, but I have no idea how". Would be better if actual industry specialists could be invited to give a more complete description of the material.» (Good)
- I learned very much and the teachers and task were very good.» (Very good)
- Bra, lärorik. ställ högre krav på eleverna.» (Very good)

29. What parts of the course should be kept to next year?

- Design Tasks»
- The design tasks. Engine lab.»
- Design task, laborations, GDI"s and future engines lectures»
- The engine laboration»
- Especially the design tasks.»
- look next answer»
- laboratory work, tasks, teachers»
- Computer GT-Power lab was very interesting. Engine lab was not so interesting. Would recommend linking the GT-Power lab to the engine lab (for example, verifying some simulation results by laboratory engine measurements.) »
- The design tasks! The teachers in general were very good and should be kept till next year.»
- behåll inlämningsuppgifterna. riktigt bra att det är upp till en själv att testa själv. lärorikt. bra med diffus ledning. dock så kan man ha ett litet möte med varje grupp ungefär halvvägs in i assignment så att man kan diskutera lite kring uppgiften...liten redovisning efter halva typ...»
- Design Tasks»
- GT-Power, the assignments and laboration.The few lectures I participated were also good!»
- gt power, gas exchange, spary (SI, DI), future trendends,»

30. What should be changed for next year?

- Written report for the engine lab, otherwise one does not keep to much of it.»
- Maybe the optical measurment technics could have been given after the lab visit?»
- The book»
- Post all the suggested readings for all parts of the course, and at once.»
- -More equations and explanations about Continuity/Navier Stokes/Energy -More about CFD -Less about optical methods »
- Invite some industry insiders/experts as lecturers. »
- More work with real engines. In design task 2 it would be great if the students had a real eninge to look at in order to get better feelings for dimensions etc.»
- Kraven är för lågt ställda tycker jag. Även om ni anser att det är en avancerad kurs och att man har ett egetintresse tycker jag att man skall ha en högra kravbild. framförallt på assignments.»
- Change lecture room to one that has better air circulation so you don"t fall asleep»
- Some of the lectures. Get it more cohesive.»
- Optical Measurement, maybe more discussion of results and less technique, CFD do less equations »

31. What you like to have a compulsary lab tour in order to better understand optical measurement methods?

- No»
- That would be a great idea»
- Yes»
- Yes, as said earlier, it was very useful to me.»
- Oh yes, that would be good. I think this time, it was just before the exams and then people are not as interested.»
- Yes, it"s ok.»
- very interesting idea, it is a good way to give interest to a lecture and to understand»
- Lab tour should definitely be kept and perhaps strongly recommended to students. But I think it should remain optional since not all students may be interested in this field.»
- yes, it gives u an idea about the technology and setup»
- Yes, that would definitely be a good idea. Prefferably directly after the optical measurements lectures!»
- Yes»
- It was fun to see how you work with engines.»
- That would be great!»
- Ja it was good to get a better understanding»

32. General comments

- About lectures, the teachers should give some guide lines or sum up of the important and hard parts to understand better the book and the course. In Sweden, you have good ideas to give interest to the students, and their ideas are take into account. »
- very good as a whole»
- I think its not the best way to grade such complex subject based on 10 exame questions, more graded exercises, graded laborations and graded presentations would be good. »

Kursutvärderingssystem från