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.

Finite element method - Applications, 2010, VSM014

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2010-03-18 - 2010-04-20
Antal svar: 18
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 26%
Kontaktperson: Fredrik Larsson»
Utbildningsprogram som genomför enkäten: Chalmers

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.

18 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»1 5%
Around 20 hours/week»5 27%
Around 25 hours/week»8 44%
Around 30 hours/week»4 22%
At least 35 hours/week»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.83

- very good lectures» (Around 20 hours/week)
- The amount of work was reasonable.» (Around 25 hours/week)
- most of the time was taken by the assignments.» (Around 30 hours/week)

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

18 svarande

0%»1 5%
25%»0 0%
50%»0 0%
75%»3 16%
100%»14 77%

Genomsnitt: 4.61

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.

3. How understandable are the course goals?

18 svarande

I have not seen/read the goals»4 22%
The goals are difficult to understand»0 0%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»6 33%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»8 44%

Genomsnitt: 3

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.

14 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»0 0%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»14 100%
No, the goals are set too high»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2

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

15 svarande

No, not at all»0 0%
To some extent»4 26%
Yes, definitely»9 60%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»2 13%

Genomsnitt: 2.86

- the exam felt a little bit to easy or standardized considering the level on the course material» (To some extent)

Teaching and course administration

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

17 svarande

Small extent»1 5%
Some extent»4 23%
Large extent»7 41%
Great extent»5 29%

Genomsnitt: 2.94

- The path followed during lectures could be clearer, sometimes I understood what was going on, but not why. Also, what is assumed in the course (like expressions of potential eneergies, etc) could be said more explicitely, or give references.» (Large extent)
- The lectures were very good and helpful for learning. » (Great extent)

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

18 svarande

Small extent»0 0%
Some extent»4 22%
Large extent»11 61%
Great extent»3 16%

Genomsnitt: 2.94

- The compendium on buckling appears to be a little bit unstructured, to a large extent depending on the similar notations used for different parts of the compendium.» (Some extent)
- The companions were very helpful.» (Large extent)
- excellent course material» (Great extent)

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

18 svarande

Very badly»0 0%
Rather badly»0 0%
Rather well»8 44%
Very well»10 55%

Genomsnitt: 3.55

- i would suggest that it would be more nice to let the students know that they will be allowed to use the notes and book as aid in exam . than i think it will help them more.and they would go through them more. » (Very well)
- You could find everything you needed.» (Very well)

Study climate

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

18 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Rather poor»0 0%
Rather good»5 27%
Very good»11 61%
I did not seek help»2 11%

Genomsnitt: 3.83

- Having specific hours for students to come for help is a good idea.» (Rather good)
- The exercise periods provided an opportunity to get help with the projects.» (Very good)

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

18 svarande

Very poorly»1 5%
Rather poorly»0 0%
Rather well»6 33%
Very well»11 61%
I did not seek cooperation»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.5

- Communictaion problem between him and me, he didn"t answer my mails and sms which led to that I handed in project 2 without his name on and continued to work alone in the next project.» (Very poorly)
- I did my assignments alone, but on the other hand that was my preference so I cannot complain too much.» (Rather well)
- We studied a lot together, and asked each other if it was something we didn"t understand.» (Very well)

11. How was the course workload?

18 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»0 0%
Adequate»9 50%
High»8 44%
Too high»1 5%

Genomsnitt: 3.55

- The assignments take quite some time but they are quite good regarding as they give a thorough work with the course material.» (High)
- It took a lot of time to look for programming errors even though i already understood the underlying concept. » (High)

12. How was the total workload this study period?

18 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»0 0%
Adequate»6 33%
High»9 50%
Too high»3 16%

Genomsnitt: 3.83

- Took three courses, so had a lot of assignments to hand in... And the course in Fundamental structural dynamics took a lot of time.» (High)
- My workload is not really the problem for the examiner of this course....» (Too high)


13. How was the workload in CA1: Mechanical analysis of the Hoover Dam?

18 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»1 5%
Adequate»13 72%
High»4 22%
Too High»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.16

- looking for programming errors took a lot of time» (High)

14. To what extent was CA1 interesting and helpful for learning the topic?

18 svarande

Small/no extent»0 0%
Some extent»6 33%
Large extent»7 38%
Great extent»5 27%

Genomsnitt: 2.94

- In my case, the last time I used CALFEM was for 4 years ago and I spent more time remembering how to use CALFEM than working on the project» (Some extent)
- it gave a better understanding of how the finite element works in getting a nice solution to the problem.» (Large extent)
- I was very good for repetition of the FE method and to brush up on the calfem toolbox.» (Great extent)

15. How was the workload in CA2?

Two optional projects were available. Please indicate which one You solved.

18 svarande


Too low»0 0%
Low»0 0%
Adequate»8 44%
High»8 44%
Too High»2 11%

Genomsnitt: 3.66

Fördelat på olika grupper:

Elasto-plastic analysis of a cantilever...: (16 st)
Too low0 0%
Low0 0%
Adequate6 37%
High8 50%
Too High2 12%

Genomsnitt: 3.75

- looking for programming errors took a lot of time» (High)

Non-linear heat conduction analysis...: (2 st)
Too low0 0%
Low0 0%
Adequate2 100%
High0 0%
Too High0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3

16. To what extent was CA2 interesting and helpful for learning the topic?

Two optional projects were available. Please indicate which one You solved.

18 svarande


Small/no extent»0 0%
Some extent»2 11%
Large extent»12 66%
Great extent»4 22%

Genomsnitt: 3.11

Fördelat på olika grupper:

Elasto-plastic analysis of a cantilever...: (16 st)
Small/no extent0 0%
Some extent2 12%
Large extent11 68%
Great extent3 18%

Genomsnitt: 3.06

- it was a good chance to see how to simulate behaviour of materials that they have in reality or close to that » (Large extent)

Non-linear heat conduction analysis...: (2 st)
Small/no extent0 0%
Some extent0 0%
Large extent1 50%
Great extent1 50%

Genomsnitt: 3.5

- This was a good assignment in that it provided good opportunity for coding in MatLAB and learning the theory through derivations.» (Great extent)

17. How was the workload in CA3: Stress and buckling analysis of thin-walled steel plate?

18 svarande

Too Low»0 0%
Low»1 5%
Adequate»10 55%
High»7 38%
Too High»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.33

- mainly because the C matrix was writen correctly, and yet giving wrong results.» (High)
- looking for programming errors took a lot of time» (High)

18. To what extent was CA3 interesting and helpful for learning the topic?

18 svarande

No/small extent»0 0%
Some extent»5 27%
Large extent»9 50%
Great extent»4 22%

Genomsnitt: 2.94

- For both CA1 and CA3 it would have been more useful to have less of an emphasis on coding and more of an emphasis on the theory. This would have better aided in the understanding of the course material and in preparation for the exam.» (Some extent)
- it gave a very nice understanding of how the different behaviour of material are achieved and which conditions effect them. the coupling and decoupling of first order and second order stuff.» (Great extent)

19. To what extent was the lab with ABAQUS interesting and helpful for learning the topic?

18 svarande

No/small extent»6 33%
Some extent»7 38%
Large extent»4 22%
Great extent»1 5%

Genomsnitt: 2

- A small extent due to the theoretical focus of the course, but since subsequent courses use ABAQUS for computer assignments some familiarity of the program is nice to have.» (No/small extent)
- It was a good idea but it should have been larger and it was a big drawback that the assistants didnt know the software» (No/small extent)
- It was interesting but not very useful for learning.» (Some extent)
- 2 hours was too short, would have been interesting to learn to use the program» (Some extent)
- It is useful to have, to see how FEM is used in practice.» (Some extent)

20. How was the level of difficulty of the written exam

18 svarande

Too low»1 5%
Low»0 0%
Adequate»12 66%
High»5 27%
Too High»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.16

- it was a well prepared exam for one could feel the level of difficulty was sorted out well. Q1 . easy, Q2 tricky Q3 somewhat difficult and tricky. WELL COOKED EXAM :)» (Adequate)
- altough some exercise were not clear enough. For exemple, was the section A in the first exercise a function of x ?» (Adequate)
- The exam appeared to contain the different areas covered but at the same time the problems did not require too much handwriting (no super long equations like for 3-d beams etc) which is good as it saves time for thinking during the exam.» (Adequate)
- The exam was challenging, but had a similar structure to the previous exams.» (High)
- The exam was a good test of our knowledge in the theory and application.» (High)

Summarizing questions

21. What is your general impression of the course?

18 svarande

Poor»0 0%
Fair»0 0%
Adequate»5 27%
Good»12 66%
Excellent»1 5%

Genomsnitt: 3.77

- The lectures was somewhat hard to follow since quite a few of the concepts are very abstract, at times it felt more like learning by heart than being able to understand why certain methods were used.» (Adequate)
- I felt privileged to study this course. The real life nature of the problems provided us with an opportunity to practice the application of theory from the lectures, to practice. One suggestion that I would like to put forward is that, since the instructions are blackboard based, many students try to copy what the teacher writes on the board. Sometimes it becomes somewhat hard to follow the teacher"s discussion of the literature while copying from the board. So I suggest that the teacher should try to slow down a bit so that the students copy everything from the board once the teacher is finished with his explanations.» (Adequate)
- I liked the format of the course and the content was very interesting, and the level seems to be appropriate.» (Good)
- But could be more applied. And not so much repetition at the beginning. I guess (or hope), that the students who are taking this course know some FEM when they come.» (Good)
- The course was good. I think the name of the course should be changed though. The name FEM-Applications gives the impression that the course will deal more with applications and using programs such as ABEQUS. I think a more applicable name would be FEM-Advanced Course.» (Good)
- Probably the best course I have attended so far» (Excellent)

22. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- the assignments are very helpful and also the introduction to ABAQUS»
- CA3 and the ABAQUS lab»
- the projects»
- The assignments was fun and made those parts of material a bit more hands on.»
- course material »
- The projects and companions should definitely be preserved. »
- Fredrik, he was a really good lecturer.»
- Well I suppose, the course contents are good enough.»
- The structure of having projects and a final exam is good an should be kept.»

23. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- i do not find any problem except that the old exams or the exam aids should be posted well in advance so that student knows that its imp to go through notes to know what is the right place to look for a particular problem and so that they can practive the excersis in end then .. »
- Make sure that all computer labs have an adequate whiteboard. I used to be in MT0, the whiteboard position and size in that room are not adequate. »
- More abaqus projects. Perhaps one project entire in abaqus»
- some way to go around spending so much time looking for programming errors that are not part of understanding the concept»
- The students pursuing a specialization in building performance should have an opportunity to relate FEM to more related applications. Also, there should be more tasks related to using software, such as Abaqus and Comsol.»
- The lectures on plates weren"t that good...»
- The course contents are good enough.»
- The projects should have a little more focus on the theory, to better prepare for the exam.»

24. Additional comments

- Thank you Fedrik for making this course interesting and making us understand it.»
- I would like to see more connection with Abaqus. Something like we did in CA3. »
- I personally would have liked to see a focus on time discretization and explicit problems but that probably would have excluded other parts of the course that are important in a first advanced level FE course.»
- Nil»

Kursutvärderingssystem från