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.

Introduction to Automotive Engineering 2009, TME120

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2009-10-26 - 2009-11-13
Antal svar: 39
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 61%
Kontaktperson: Malin Kjellberg»

Your own effort

1. 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.

39 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»7 17%
Around 20 hours/week»11 28%
Around 25 hours/week»16 41%
Around 30 hours/week»4 10%
At least 35 hours/week»1 2%

Genomsnitt: 2.51

- Too many hours for too few things» (At most 15 hours/week)
- Sometimes I feel I don"t I have enough time to read the book after lecture and spending a lot of time on the assignments.» (Around 25 hours/week)
- Mostly on assignments» (Around 25 hours/week)
- It was just the right amount of work load through lectures and assignments.» (Around 25 hours/week)

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

39 svarande

0%»1 2%
25%»1 2%
50%»3 7%
75%»16 41%
100%»18 46%

Genomsnitt: 4.25

- except 2 lecture» (100%)
- Really not necessary» (100%)

Goals and goal fulfilment

The course syllabus states the course goals in terms of learning outcomes, i.e., knowledge, skills and attitudes to be acquired by the student during the course. The learning outcomes of this course are:

After the project course the student should be able to:
•, locate and classify different systems and components in a ground vehicle
•, identify and analyze the subsystems’, and components’, influence on the vehicle design
•, interpret and analyze the manufacturer’,s role in the automotive industry
•, describe and explain the supplier role in the automotive industry
•, describe how the product development process influences the automotive industry
•, create, evaluate and defend solutions to three specific problems within the areas of powertrain, vehicle dynamics and safety.

3. How understandable are the course goals?

39 svarande

I have not seen/read the goals»1 2%
The goals are difficult to understand»0 0%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»14 35%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»24 61%

Genomsnitt: 3.56

- Also,there were some shortageS in case of Platform,Body,Chasis,Interior components,Sub Mechanism design,Quality,and various Measuring Systems and Tools, Test plans and Standards in Automotive Enineering Industry and etc.» (The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer)

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

Answer this this question and the succeeding one, only if you do know the course goals.

38 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»5 13%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»32 84%
No, the goals are set too high»1 2%

Genomsnitt: 1.89

- More than low, they are untrue: you can"t try to teach so few about so many subjects without falling into excesive simplicity» (No, the goals are set too low)
- The course is a little to basic. I think most students already knew most of the stuff before.» (No, the goals are set too low)

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

38 svarande

No, not at all»0 0%
To some extent»16 42%
Yes, definitely»18 47%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»4 10%

Genomsnitt: 2.68

- No results out yet» (I don"t know/have not been examined yet)

Lectures, visits and assignments

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

Please tell us what you think of the different lectures. If the topic is relevant and if it is on the correct level. If there are two questions on one lecture is that because the lecturer has asked for more detailed information and input from you.

Matrisfråga

- I think the lectures did a good job in giving us some insights into the different vehicle subsystems and the automotive industry. I hope some coures like NVH and control systems can go quick through the basic theory part and give more information of what happens in the real industry. Moreover, I think we can have more than one lecture containing more information for some coures about the important components of vehicles.»
- Some courses I attended but I dont remember exactly so I choose the ""did not attend this lecture""»
- The Tyre lecture must be seriously thought about. At some points "Mats Beckman" was talking Swedish and mostly fooling around. This must have been one of the worst lectures i"ve attended during my 4 years at Chalmers. Half the class is from other countries and by mixing in Swedish words in the lecture is just disrespectful. Many of the slides also had swedish words in them, which would complicate the learning process for the non-swedish students. Those parts should be reviewed and taken out of the parts needed to study for the exam.»
- Too much propaganda in the guest lectures.»
- Some of the lectures were not attended because the time was needed to finish assignments and also because some of these lectures did not catch the attention. Some of these were not exposed in a proper way from the very beginning and therefore, they were boring.»
- I have a big problem with getting up early and sometimes I had to finish assignments so could not come to the lectures»

Automotive History, Introduction - Sven Andersson & Malin Kjellberg*
39 svarande

Very bad - no relevance for the course»0 0%
Bad - to some extent relevant for the overall topic»1 2%
OK - needed and well performed»12 32%
Good - well needed and interesting»18 48%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»6 16%
Did not attend this lecture»2

Genomsnitt: 3.78

Engine Characteristics and Design - Sven Andersson*
39 svarande

Very bad - no relevance for the course»0 0%
Bad - to some extent relevant for the overall topic»1 2%
OK - needed and well performed»6 16%
Good - well needed and interesting»16 43%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»14 37%
Did not attend this lecture»2

Genomsnitt: 4.16

Powertrain Systems - Jan Andersson*
39 svarande

Very bad - no relevance for the course»0 0%
Bad - to some extent relevant for the overall topic»4 11%
OK - needed and well performed»11 32%
Good - well needed and interesting»14 41%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»5 14%
Did not attend this lecture»5

Genomsnitt: 3.58

Braking Systems - Malin Kjellberg*
39 svarande

Very bad - no relevance for the course»0 0%
Bad - to some extent relevant for the overall topic»4 10%
OK - needed and well performed»11 29%
Good - well needed and interesting»14 37%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»8 21%
Did not attend this lecture»2

Genomsnitt: 3.7

Tyres - Mats Beckman*
39 svarande

Very bad - no relevance for the course»6 17%
Bad - to some extent relevant for the overall topic»14 41%
OK - needed and well performed»12 35%
Good - well needed and interesting»1 2%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»1 2%
Did not attend this lecture»5

Genomsnitt: 2.32

Noise, Vibration and Harshness - Lars Ivarsson*
39 svarande

Very bad - no relevance for the course»0 0%
Bad - to some extent relevant for the overall topic»7 19%
OK - needed and well performed»15 41%
Good - well needed and interesting»11 30%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»3 8%
Did not attend this lecture»3

Genomsnitt: 3.27

Suspensions, components and geometry - Malin Kjellberg*
39 svarande

Very bad - no relevance for the course»0 0%
Bad - to some extent relevant for the overall topic»3 8%
OK - needed and well performed»13 36%
Good - well needed and interesting»14 38%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»6 16%
Did not attend this lecture»3

Genomsnitt: 3.63

Vehicle Dynamics and SHARK introduction - Steve Williams*
39 svarande

Very bad - no relevance for the course»0 0%
Bad - to some extent relevant for the overall topic»1 2%
OK - needed and well performed»9 23%
Good - well needed and interesting»16 42%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»12 31%
Did not attend this lecture»1

Genomsnitt: 4.02

Predictive Methods - Steve Williams*
39 svarande

Very bad - no relevance for the course»0 0%
Bad - to some extent relevant for the overall topic»1 2%
OK - needed and well performed»9 24%
Good - well needed and interesting»15 40%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»12 32%
Did not attend this lecture»2

Genomsnitt: 4.02

Suspension characteristics - Steve Williams*
39 svarande

Very bad - no relevance for the course»0 0%
Bad - to some extent relevant for the overall topic»1 2%
OK - needed and well performed»8 21%
Good - well needed and interesting»15 39%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»14 36%
Did not attend this lecture»1

Genomsnitt: 4.1

Supplier role in Automotive Product Development - Supplier categories - Hans Rössle*
39 svarande

Very bad - no relevance for the course»1 2%
Bad - to some extent relevant for the overall topic»2 5%
OK - needed and well performed»9 26%
Good - well needed and interesting»12 35%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»10 29%
Did not attend this lecture»5

Genomsnitt: 3.82

Supplier role in Automotive Product Development - The development process - Hans Rössle*
39 svarande

Very bad - no relevance for the course»0 0%
Bad - to some extent relevant for the overall topic»3 8%
OK - needed and well performed»10 29%
Good - well needed and interesting»12 35%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»9 26%
Did not attend this lecture»5

Genomsnitt: 3.79

Road Vehicle Aerodynamics - Lennart Löfdahl*
39 svarande

Very bad - no relevance for the course»0 0%
Bad - to some extent relevant for the overall topic»2 5%
OK - needed and well performed»5 13%
Good - well needed and interesting»21 56%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»9 24%
Did not attend this lecture»2

Genomsnitt: 4

Control Systems - Bo Egardt*
39 svarande

Very bad - no relevance for the course»1 3%
Bad - to some extent relevant for the overall topic»9 27%
OK - needed and well performed»11 33%
Good - well needed and interesting»8 24%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»4 12%
Did not attend this lecture»6

Genomsnitt: 3.15

Materials in Vehicle Production - Pål Schmidt*
39 svarande

Very bad - no relevance for the course»2 5%
Bad - to some extent relevant for the overall topic»10 27%
OK - needed and well performed»7 19%
Good - well needed and interesting»15 41%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»2 5%
Did not attend this lecture»3

Genomsnitt: 3.13

Safety / Crashworthiness - Mats Svensson*
39 svarande

Very bad - no relevance for the course»1 2%
Bad - to some extent relevant for the overall topic»4 10%
OK - needed and well performed»10 26%
Good - well needed and interesting»16 42%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»7 18%
Did not attend this lecture»1

Genomsnitt: 3.63

Safety -assignment introduction - Johan Davidsson*
39 svarande

Very bad - no relevance for the course»1 2%
Bad - to some extent relevant for the overall topic»7 18%
OK - needed and well performed»11 29%
Good - well needed and interesting»12 32%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»6 16%
Did not attend this lecture»2

Genomsnitt: 3.4

Design Management & process at Volvo Cars - Thomas Bergqvist*
39 svarande

Very bad - no relevance for the course»1 3%
Bad - to some extent relevant for the overall topic»0 0%
OK - needed and well performed»15 48%
Good - well needed and interesting»10 32%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»5 16%
Did not attend this lecture»8

Genomsnitt: 3.58

Vehicle Development and Certification - Malin Kjellberg*
39 svarande

Very bad - no relevance for the course»1 2%
Bad - to some extent relevant for the overall topic»3 8%
OK - needed and well performed»11 32%
Good - well needed and interesting»14 41%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»5 14%
Did not attend this lecture»5

Genomsnitt: 3.55

Environmental issues during Automotive Development - Andreas Andersson*
39 svarande

Very bad - no relevance for the course»2 6%
Bad - to some extent relevant for the overall topic»5 16%
OK - needed and well performed»12 38%
Good - well needed and interesting»10 32%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»2 6%
Did not attend this lecture»8

Genomsnitt: 3.16

Safety / Crashworthiness - Yngve Håland*
39 svarande

Very bad - no relevance for the course»1 2%
Bad - to some extent relevant for the overall topic»4 11%
OK - needed and well performed»9 25%
Good - well needed and interesting»15 42%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»6 17%
Did not attend this lecture»4

Genomsnitt: 3.6

Global trends in AE Industry - Svenåke Bergelie*
39 svarande

Very bad - no relevance for the course»1 3%
Bad - to some extent relevant for the overall topic»2 7%
OK - needed and well performed»9 33%
Good - well needed and interesting»11 40%
Very good - interesting and rewarding»4 14%
Did not attend this lecture»12

Genomsnitt: 3.55

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

Matrisfråga

- The "problem" with the visit in the "Blue Train" is that the speaker was not an engineering but only a speaker. »
- These visits are quite good. Hope to have more chances to communicate with the people from automotive industry.»
- A more personalized visit of the volvo factory should be interesting.»
- I think that if the visits were not mandatory, the lectures given there should not being evaluated in the final exam.»

Johnson Controls - Torslanda - Development process - Bengt Börjesson*
39 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Rather poor»0 0%
OK»5 25%
Rather good»5 25%
Very good»10 50%
Did not attend the visit»19

Genomsnitt: 4.25

Johnson Controls - Torslanda - Production tour - Tomas Broman*
39 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Rather poor»1 5%
OK»4 20%
Rather good»4 20%
Very good»11 55%
Did not attend the visit»19

Genomsnitt: 4.25

Volvo Cars Brand Experience Centre - Safety and environment*
39 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Rather poor»0 0%
OK»3 11%
Rather good»9 33%
Very good»15 55%
Did not attend the visit»12

Genomsnitt: 4.44

Volvo Cars Torslanda Assembly Plant - Blue train*
39 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Rather poor»1 3%
OK»5 18%
Rather good»9 33%
Very good»12 44%
Did not attend the visit»12

Genomsnitt: 4.18

Safety presentation - Lotta Jacobsson*
39 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Rather poor»1 4%
OK»5 20%
Rather good»8 32%
Very good»11 44%
Did not attend the visit»14

Genomsnitt: 4.16

Active Ssafety/Vehicle Dynamics Presentation - Erik Coelingh*
39 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Rather poor»1 3%
OK»3 11%
Rather good»8 30%
Very good»14 53%
Did not attend the visit»13

Genomsnitt: 4.34

Powertrain Presentation - Börje Grandin*
39 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Rather poor»0 0%
OK»5 19%
Rather good»11 42%
Very good»10 38%
Did not attend the visit»13

Genomsnitt: 4.19

8. What did you think of the assignments?*

Were they of help for your learning and of relevance to the course topics?

Matrisfråga

- suspension project was a bit of a pain because of a program bug where the tolerances defined in the beginning wouldn"t work when adjusting the suspension points»
- Both the suspension and the safety assignments are relevant, but thier layout was very poor! Safety was not a well constructed assignment.»
- First to assignments were fun and interessting. Safety on the other hand were not so interessting.»
- The assignment on Suspension optimization could be modified a bit. The current assignment concentrates more on getting the values into tolerance zone. I could not appretiate the relevance of that tolerance zone.»
- The demands on how the reports should be written varied between the different assignments. In assignment 3 we were no longer allowed to include Matlab codes as a reference to the calculations that were made. If any special desires are requested, this should be clearly written somewhere. To get a redo on all the formulas and calculations is a lot of work and could have been avoided. The suspension assignment did not give me or my friends anything. Many people were confused of what the point was with moving "Hardpoints" 1 or 2 mm to the right and left. And why is it totally necessary for everyone to get the right values in the report? How can that possibly be of any interest. You could at least have informed us of why this is so important.»
- The suspensions optimization assignment was more like playing around with values and didnt help me understand the subject to the extent the other assignments helped me to understand the subject»
- The third assignment makes no sense at all. It is a very dufficult thing to simplify and it is not done correctly.»
- The suspension assignment was mostly focused on drawing a suspension and not on its functioning.»
- The TAs are way to picky correcting things with no relevance for the learning outcomes. »
- the assistants need to be fully prepared for the assignments, which they usually are not found»
- The assignments were ok, but certain details took alot of unnecessary time. personally i dont like to be assigned groups, but that might be necessary.»
- Suspension - Shark bugs an issues Safety - Lack of time, bad help from assistants»
- What was the point with SHARK»
- The powertrain assignment are more or less just physical calculations and a lot of text to write. The suspension assignment with good in principle, but we didn"t really know about how the different parts effect each parameter so it was trial&error. The safety assignment was OK, sometimes the task was a bit hard to understand»

Powertrain, design of driveline diagram*
39 svarande

Really bad, no relevance»1 2%
To some extent relevant»3 7%
OK»5 12%
Relevant and good experience»11 28%
Very good exercise for my learning»19 48%
No opinion»0

Genomsnitt: 4.12

Suspension. optimisation of SUV characteristics*
39 svarande

Really bad, no relevance»6 15%
To some extent relevant»8 20%
OK»10 25%
Relevant and good experience»8 20%
Very good exercise for my learning»7 17%
No opinion»0

Genomsnitt: 3.05

Safety, compatibility calculations and loads*
39 svarande

Really bad, no relevance»3 7%
To some extent relevant»4 10%
OK»8 20%
Relevant and good experience»15 38%
Very good exercise for my learning»9 23%
No opinion»0

Genomsnitt: 3.58

Teaching and course administration

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

38 svarande

Small extent»2 5%
Some extent»17 44%
Large extent»15 39%
Great extent»4 10%

Genomsnitt: 2.55

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

38 svarande

Small extent»8 21%
Some extent»14 36%
Large extent»10 26%
Great extent»6 15%

Genomsnitt: 2.36

- Didn´,t even read it since the PP were suffiencient.» (Small extent)
- Still haven"t opened the book.» (Small extent)
- never opened the book» (Small extent)
- Actually none, I have barely open the book. I could clear the course without the course literature.» (Small extent)
- The book was bad» (Small extent)

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

38 svarande

Very badly»1 2%
Rather badly»3 7%
Rather well»22 57%
Very well»12 31%

Genomsnitt: 3.18

- The presentation slides should be on the homepage some hours before the lecture starts, so it"s easier to take notes» (Very badly)
- The PP should be availible earlier.» (Rather badly)
- The lecture slides were often late put out. We got a type exam uploaded on the website only 2 days (!) before the exam. This may have been on purpose though. Assignment 3 slides were uploaded VERY late! The question sheet was not uploaded at all(?).» (Rather badly)

Study climate

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

38 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Rather poor»1 2%
Rather good»21 55%
Very good»15 39%
I did not seek help»1 2%

Genomsnitt: 3.42

- It was okey, but the computer rooms are like the worst nightmare... without having time booked there it is impossible until 17.00 to get a free computer to work in assignment. MUST be more time in computer rooms for espacially shark assignment.» (Rather good)
- Especially good was at assignment 1. Thanks to the three kind Phd students.» (Rather good)

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

38 svarande

Very poorly»3 7%
Rather poorly»8 21%
Rather well»7 18%
Very well»20 52%
I did not seek cooperation»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.15

- I did every thing my fellow student did not do any thing» (Very poorly)
- It didnt work well with my given partner, I did 90% av the assignments and reports. My partner was often late, didnt know what to do and didnt keep in touch.» (Very poorly)
- Always late (1-2h) otherwise it felt like I could do the assignments by myself since it took more time to explain everything for my partner.» (Rather poorly)
- Good communication with the other students. » (Very well)

14. How was the course workload?

38 svarande

Too low»1 2%
Low»1 2%
Adequate»19 50%
High»14 36%
Too high»3 7%

Genomsnitt: 3.44

- High but I learn stuff i like soo good.» (High)
- The lecutres are too many.» (Too high)

15. How was the total workload this study period?

38 svarande

Too low»1 2%
Low»0 0%
Adequate»12 31%
High»21 55%
Too high»4 10%

Genomsnitt: 3.71

- Along with formula it was "lagom"» (Too low)
- Ok, approx 50h/week» (High)
- CFS...» (High)
- Almost no time to study for the exams, due to the assignments. Nothing in particular was hard, it was just too much to do. » (Too high)

Summarizing questions

16. What is your general impression of the course?

38 svarande

Poor»1 2%
Fair»4 10%
Adequate»13 34%
Good»17 44%
Excellent»3 7%

Genomsnitt: 3.44

- Very dissapointing. Too many hours for too few useful concepts» (Poor)
- too basic» (Fair)
- I expected more like a course in the different parts of a car (braking systems, suspension etc.) but it was more or less an overview about all automotive topics that are thought or that are of matter. For this overview it was OK.» (Adequate)

17. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- The study visit to Volvo and Johnson Control.»
- The Variety of topics covered. Also, having experts from different fields makes it more interesting.»
- Some version of assignment 1 and the company visits.»
- I think the visits and the assignments are really good for us to understand the knowledges better. »
- The lectures of Steve Williams, the visit to Jonhson control»
- Assignment 1-2»
- Visit to Volvo, Johnsson Controls and Assignment1, 3.»
- Visit of some workshop to see different patrs of the car specially in powertrain and suspension cases.»
- Assignment 1!»
- Visits and guest lectures, but avoiding the propaganda»
- The lectures are interesting but some of the lecturers should change the way to present them.»
- the assignmennts»
- Visit to johnson controls while working. Presentation about providers role, as it is the most probable working scenario in the future.»
- the company tours and guests lectures»
- I would like a cad course:) Maybe some kind of combination. Half cad, hald the good parts from the introduction.»
- The company visits are pretty good. Especially the visit to the Safety Center at Volvo was really interesting. Also their presentations were good. »

18. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- The tyre lecture needs to be improved definitely. The teacher always spoke Swedish during his lecture!»
- Kindly consider the possibility of reducing the workload, by atleast a little bit. In my opinion, too much time was spent on doing the assignments.»
- If you are going to have assignments late in the study period, make sure that they are well written, in other words, be specific with what you want answered. »
- The lecture about tyres.»
- Assignment 3 could be skipped.. more computer time. Tyre leasson sucked.. could read it by my own. Material leasson the same.. already know since material courses.»
- Assignment 2»
- The report writing. Why go through how to write a report when it"s not applied in all assignments (ass 3)?»
- Tyre lecture, Assignment of suspension system.»
- Assignment 2! - Explain a little clearer what the point of this assignment is. Is it really important to get all the values right? If they are... explain why. Either skip the Tyre lecture totally... Or seriously change it. »
- The suspension assignment should be modified to help the students learn rather than focus on the numbers»
- No more endless slideshows»
- visit to any car working/mechanic place and to teach the basic castor,camber like things prior to the start of the course»
- Optional groups»
- All lectures should not being included as a material for the final exam. The whole material is difficult to read and study in a short time, specially if we take into account that there are others assignments and exams to study.»
- The correction protocol. maybe the course should be switch for a cad. we get the saftey in the saftey course, the vehicle dyn in the......»
- the assistants for the assignments are supposed to be replaced»
- No fixed groups, let the students choose for themselfs.»
- The book we used and some of the guest presentations»

19. Additional comments

- No more endless slideshows»
- overall it was a nice learning experience.»

* obligatoriska frågor

Kursutvärderingssystem från