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.

Advanced Passive Safety 2010, TME195

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2010-06-02 - 2010-07-17
Antal svar: 7
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 46%
Kontaktperson: Johan Davidsson»

1. What is your general impression of the course?

6 svarande

Worst course ever»1 16%
Fair»1 16%
Adequate»0 0%
Good»3 50%
Excellent»1 16%
Best course ever»0 0%
No answer»0

Genomsnitt: 3.33

- I found that the volume of topics covered was quite high. We had to study a lot of slides (~1000) for the exam. It would be better if you could pare down the content.» (Good)

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

6 svarande

Poor»0 0%
Fair»0 0%
Acceptable»0 0%
Good»4 66%
Excellent»2 33%

Genomsnitt: 4.33

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

Answer this this question only if you do know the course goals.

4 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»0 0%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»4 100%
No, the goals are set too high»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2

4. Do you think the course should cover more or fewer topics?

6 svarande

more»1 16%
reasonable»2 33%
fewer»3 50%

Genomsnitt: 2.33 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

- More car design instead of human body topics» (more)
- The content was too voluminous.» (fewer)
- Statistics and biology. I have really missed vehicle body structure.» (fewer)

5. If you compare the course with other courses you have attended, how difficult was the course?

6 svarande

very easy»0 0%
easy»0 0%
the same»3 50%
difficult»2 33%
very difficult»1 16%

Genomsnitt: 3.66

- very lengthy subject with lots of topics (books and slides )» (difficult)
- too much of bio was not what i was looking for. I want more of vehicle structures and Crash Analysis !! » (very difficult)

6. How was the course workload?

5 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»0 0%
Adequate»3 60%
High»2 40%
Too high»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.4

- but not devided evenly over the quarter. too much workload at the end of the course» (Adequate)

7. How was the total workload this study period?

6 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»0 0%
Adequate»3 50%
High»3 50%
Too high»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.5

8. What is you general opinion about the assignmnet 1 (LS-Dyna)?

6 svarande

Poor»0 0%
Adequate»2 33%
Good»4 66%

Genomsnitt: 2.66

- It would be good to have developing the entire model as a part of the assignment as it would give experience in building models for analysis.» (Adequate)
- nice introduction for LS DYNA software» (Good)
- Very good - gives us an insight into how these tools are used. I think you could also include meshing and setting of all the matl props/boundary conditions.» (Good)
- I think it gives a good inpression about how it is like working with such a field in the industry» (Good)

9. What is you general opinion about the assignmnet 2 (Accidentology)?

6 svarande

Good»1 16%
Acceptable»3 50%
Marginal»1 16%
Poor»1 16%

Genomsnitt: 2.33

- Gives an idea of what databases exist and how it is used. The only unfavourable part was the limited number of cases to work with.» (Acceptable)
- I learned from it but it was very boring» (Acceptable)
- short time to acquaint with software» (Marginal)
- too low database entries and poor knowledge on access makes this assign worse . By changing the way i connect the tables, i can change the result i obtain !! Thats too confusing to begin with.» (Poor)

10. I learnt a lot from listening to presentations

6 svarande

I fully disagree»0 0%
I disagree»0 0%
I neither agree nor disagree»1 16%
I agree»2 33%
I fully agree»2 33%
I did not attend»1 16%

Genomsnitt: 4.5

- Seeing how other teams deal with the same problem is a good way to learn, and to see a different approach.» (I fully agree)

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

6 svarande

0%»0 0%
25%»0 0%
50%»1 16%
75%»3 50%
100%»2 33%

Genomsnitt: 4.16

12. Please include a comment for each lecture that you have an opinion on (positive or negative)

Introduction Johan Davidsson
Head anatomy, physiology and injuries Johan Davidsson
Neck anatomy, physiology and injuries Johan Davidsson
Thorax and abdomen physiology and injuries Bengt Pipkorn
Extremity anatomy and injuries Johan Davidsson
Mathematical modelling in biomechanics, overview and rigid body Jac Wismans
Dynamic FEM 1 Lennart Josefson
Dynamic FEM 2 Karin Brolin
CAE in crash safety Linus Wågström
Vehicle structure and CAE Mikael Fermer/Linus Wågström
Methods for acquiring and analyse accident data Helen Fagerlind
Tissue and body units Johan Davidsson
Mechanical properties and material models of tissue Karin Brolin
Advanced accident analysis methods Irene Isaksson-Hellman
Biological models and experimental studies Johan Davidsson
Advanced methods of injury biomechanics Johan Davidsson
Injury Control Strategies Johan Davidsson
Crash and component tests, mechanical models and sensors used in these models Mats Svensson
Restraints Ola Boström
Accident reconstruction Jikuang Yang
Mathematical models Karin Brolin
Regulatory testing and the process of introducing new regulatory testing Anders Eugensson
Future in Passive Safety Jac Wismans

- All the lectures were good. It would be good to decrease the human anatomy part and concentrate more on injury prevention strategies and have a some more depth in Vehicle Crashworthinesss. »
- the lectures from johan and karin were very good (good teachers and very on-topic) the lectures from Jac Wismans were very off-topic and he repeated a lot what was already said in previous lectures. the lectures from ola bostöm were very good, he"s a good teacher (good talker) and he told interesting things in a short amount of time. Anders Eugensson did a good lecture on a not so interesting subject. He mentioned good examples from real life experiences, which made the subject interesting. the lecture of lennart josefson was waaay above the level i could understand. Jikuang Yang was hard to understand, the slides of the lecture were confusing»
- Johan Davidson is strong in biology, so the questions for the exam were about this, it should be distributed more equally. FEM 1 by Linus Wågström was to deep a lot of studients did not catch this lesson. The most interesting lessons came from Volvo.»

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

5 svarande

No, not at all»1 20%
To some extent»0 0%
Yes, definitely»4 80%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.6

- didnt take up the exam» (?)
- I have already filled the survey and forgotten to add: about 1080 slides, it is really to much for the exam preparation...» (?)
- Examination was about biology and statistics mostly, not about passive safety and vehicle.» (No, not at all)

14. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- The assignments and guest lectures from Volvo Cars and Autolive.»
- LS Dyna assignment»
- the ls-dyna assignment »
- Lessons from Volvo were really interesting.»

15. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- The last two lectures should be moved to a week before, since it was scheduled in penultimate week,many of them didn"t turned»
- Some modification in assignment 1 to make it more challenging.»
- Please try to reduce the volume of topics covered.»
- The schedule of the course, workload should be shifted more to the beginning of the course Jikuang Yangs"s english»
- Biology and statistics. I agree that we should be introduced, but during the exam, we had deep questions about this, also we didn"t learn about vehicle body (just little bit from Volvo) and we did not have about this dring the exam. The amount of biology should be switch to information about vehicle structure and devices.»
- I would like to have more of Vehicle Structures and Crash Analysis !! I never expected to have a BIO course in my Automotive MS !! I was aware about the fact that there is going to be biology in the syllabus but never expected it to be so much in depth !! »
Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 2.33

Genomsnitt totalt för alla frågor: 2.33
Beräknat jämförelseindex: 0.66

Kursutvärderingssystem från