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 Computer Aided Design, PPU080

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2010-10-20 - 2010-11-10
Antal svar: 39
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 43%
Kontaktperson: Lars Almefelt»

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.

38 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»8 21%
Around 20 hours/week»12 31%
Around 25 hours/week»9 23%
Around 30 hours/week»7 18%
At least 35 hours/week»2 5%

Genomsnitt: 2.55

- Most of the time could have been spent improving my knowledge of CATIA instead it became alot of time using google, show the basics of all the workbenches you want us to use and then let us expand on that instead.» (Around 30 hours/week)

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

39 svarande

0%»2 5%
25%»9 23%
50%»10 25%
75%»11 28%
100%»7 17%

Genomsnitt: 3.3

- Attended lectures in the start of the course. Unfortunately they were not so good, too much readin directly from slides, so skipped the last ones and read the slides myself instead. » (50%)
- The initial lectures felt unessesary.» (75%)

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?

39 svarande

I have not seen/read the goals»7 17%
The goals are difficult to understand»0 0%
The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer»16 41%
The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn»16 41%

Genomsnitt: 3.05

- I am not sure of the goals of the course, I do not believe they were presented. The dichotomy between the project and the lectures also made it difficult to even infer the goals.» (I have not seen/read the goals)

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.

35 svarande

No, the goals are set too low»4 11%
Yes, the goals seem reasonable»30 85%
No, the goals are set too high»1 2%

Genomsnitt: 1.91

- I think it is unfair to call it Advanced CAD when one could pass this course without ever having used CATIA before.» (No, the goals are set too low)
- The goals are in my opinion unrelevant. Focus should be on comparing systems/models and to create/edit models. The calculations done by the program is really not relevant for a product developement (or similar) engineer.» (No, the goals are set too low)
- Time wise, I believe the work load was reasonable given the number of credits. Not knowing the goals, I cannot judge if the goals were reasonable.» (Yes, the goals seem reasonable)

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

36 svarande

No, not at all»5 13%
To some extent»18 50%
Yes, definitely»11 30%
I don"t know/have not been examined yet»2 5%

Genomsnitt: 2.27

- Again, not knowing the goals, this is difficult to answer. I do believe, however, that the goal of a CAD course for Mechanical Engineers should be being able to use CAD software in a functional way. The examination seemed more suited for Computer Engineers who would be programming a CAD course. Given my interpretation of what the goals of the course should be, it did not meet these goals.» (No, not at all)
- no exam is need in a course like this» (No, not at all)
- Same 5 questions as last year, and the year before, and before... The course is not needed to get a grade 5. Is this the way it"s supose to be?» (No, not at all)
- I think that the main focus on this course has been to perform CAD on a computer. The information that was used on the exam felt completly useless. It doesn"t really have anything in it that will be of further use.» (To some extent)
- The exam was almost too easy...» (To some extent)
- The exam was to easy with too many questions from previous exams» (Yes, definitely)

6. Was the setup of the project work good for learning CAD and CAT systems?

(e.g. excavator model, extra points for extra tasks, ...)

39 svarande

No, not at all»0 0%
To some extent»5 12%
Adequate»5 12%
Yes»14 35%
Yes, definitely»15 38%

Genomsnitt: 4

- The concept of the project was a great way to learn CAD and CAT. The process of doing solid modeling exercises and then applying our knowledge to the project worked very well. Many of the processes became trial by fire, though, as we were not taught surface modeling or most of the extra tasks. Instead of applying knowledge that had acquired, tasks often became trial and error, or desperately searching outside avenues (random internet sources) to try to acquire this knowledge. Many of the teaching assistants were unfamiliar with the knowledge required to complete the extra tasks, and thus within the context of the course, course material and teaching assistants that was literally no way to acquire the necessary knowledge.» (To some extent)
- I think the excavator was to hard...but I was lucky to have had a colleague who was so good at CAD» (To some extent)
- You learn by trial and error but I would prefer more lectures on how to build a complex product (collaboration, revision control etc) » (To some extent)
- There should be more help for learning how to use the programs more effective, and more lectures on how to do advanced parts and assemblies.» (To some extent)
- Instead of just mass-producing parts and glue them together, I would have liked to had more indepth scrutineering on how to build parts in a good way. More parametrization and overall plans before making parts.» (Adequate)
- Learning by doing is the best way of learning CAD, but this particular project could be improved a lot. It would be better to have a task that is more defined and connected to the "reality". Cause now just been making up stuff which none had been acceptable if created in real company. » (Yes)
- CAD was ok but CAT should be improve for next time to understand easily.» (Yes)
- Good layout» (Yes, definitely)
- However, the usability of the RDnT software could be improved. Another problem was that it is not possible to access the CATIA help. It made it quite hard to do the tubing exercise since there were no instructions provided in the course and all Youtube video tutorials we found were in chinese :)» (Yes, definitely)

Teaching and course administration

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

39 svarande

Small extent»15 38%
Some extent»15 38%
Large extent»8 20%
Great extent»1 2%

Genomsnitt: 1.87

- Mainly because tutors have been, as I understand it, told NOT to help. Rather advise that we try find the information ourselfs. this has applied even for the simplest of questions. I understand that they are not supposed to do it for us, but they should at least be able to tell us what to do when we find that we have done something wrong.» (Small extent)
- The lectures consisted of reading from the slides, which often only added ambiguity. Much of the knowledge needed to complete the project came from outside sources.» (Small extent)
- The lectures, the project and the exam are three different things with no connection in between.» (Small extent)
- I don"t think the lessions was good» (Small extent)
- Manly the exercise has learnt me!» (Some extent)
- Sometimes the students helped eachother better then the teacher due to lack of knowledge but they were always very helpful, EXCEPTE for the extra tasks and that is really frustrating!! Even if it is an extra task people need help with it, otherwise it would be no point of takeing the course if you knew everything before and didn"r need any help!» (Some extent)
- Alot of time was spent on searching information instead of practising on how to use Catia effectivly.» (Some extent)
- Excercise Labs help me and I got good knowledge from it» (Large extent)

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

39 svarande

Small extent»15 38%
Some extent»12 30%
Large extent»10 25%
Great extent»2 5%

Genomsnitt: 1.97

- Some of the other material that was suppose to help us with certain extra tasks was had faulty information on more than one occasion, the main one being how to import files from CATIA to RDnT. For example the paper suggests "Load Abaqus" files, a format that CATIA doesnt even know!! » (Small extent)
- Good for surface design but didn´,t need to use it so much!» (Small extent)
- The online help server provided by chalmers is unusable. Online tutorials and youtube is a better source of knowledge.» (Small extent)
- I used youtube to get help» (Small extent)
- The slides prepared us for the test. The exercises gave us basic knowledge to aid us in some project tasks.» (Some extent)
- Did not buy the course literature.» (Some extent)
- Mostly for the written exam» (Some extent)
- The preparing exercises was good but the catia help was useless. Youtube and google was the best way to find information.» (Some extent)
- Only the PLM lecture was not so satisfactory» (Large extent)
- PDFs were the only help...not the book at all!!» (Great extent)

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

39 svarande

Very badly»0 0%
Rather badly»1 2%
Rather well»24 61%
Very well»14 35%

Genomsnitt: 3.33

- No complaints.» (Rather well)
- Many tutorials were missing I got from internet if possible upload the tutorials of sheet metal work, simulation and animation and knowledgeware.» (Rather well)
- No issues here.» (Very well)

Study climate

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

38 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Rather poor»2 5%
Rather good»15 39%
Very good»16 42%
I did not seek help»5 13%

Genomsnitt: 3.63

- Help was available during exercises. There was often a long wait due to the amount of help needed by students and the overlap of demonstration and help time. Sometimes I would put my name on a long list of people needing help and demonstrating tasks, wait half an hour, only to find that the person trying to help me did not know the function I needed help with.» (Rather poor)
- See comments for question 7, enough opportunities thou.» (Rather good)
- I think the teachers were lacking a bit in knowledge, specially about RDnT.» (Rather good)
- Workshop tutors could be better prepered...» (Rather good)
- Everybody only said that we should buy the book when we asked for help.» (Rather good)

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

39 svarande

Very poorly»1 2%
Rather poorly»1 2%
Rather well»8 20%
Very well»26 66%
I did not seek cooperation»3 7%

Genomsnitt: 3.74

12. How was the course workload?

38 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»3 7%
Adequate»26 68%
High»8 21%
Too high»1 2%

Genomsnitt: 3.18

- Could have been harder» (Low)
- It was high since my co-worker did almost nothing. » (High)

13. How was the total workload this study period?

38 svarande

Too low»0 0%
Low»3 7%
Adequate»18 47%
High»15 39%
Too high»2 5%

Genomsnitt: 3.42

- to much PDM» (High)
- Everything was scheduled to the last two weeks.» (Too high)

Summarizing questions

14. What is your general impression of the course?

39 svarande

Poor»2 5%
Fair»4 10%
Adequate»11 28%
Good»18 46%
Excellent»4 10%

Genomsnitt: 3.46

- I am not sure what the purpose of the course was. If it was to teach us how to use CATIA, I think that it should have focused on that. If that was the goal we should have cut out the theoretical parts and instead had lectures and exercises that would have been useful to us in completing the project as assigned. If the goal of the course was to understand the theory behind CAD, it should not be mandatory, and there should be no project. The lectures also need to provide some insight that the slides cannot.» (Poor)
- I must say I am very, very disappointed in this course. Putting 7,5 credits on CAD should be enough for becoming fairly talented in using the chosen CAD-software. Based on the learning outcomes from this course only, I would say that no one is competent enough to create any well-made complex shape or using special features such as sheet metal design properly. To be honest, I think that many participants in this course who have less prior CAD experience than me can"t even make their sketches properly. We had almost no lecture at all describing the actual work in a CAD environment and the power and logic of different tools or operations (no hints). The project was what made me the most irritated. Sitting there figuring out how to do by trial and error IN SCHOOL, is just ridiculous. Why should I spend my time and money going to courses like these where I just as well could have taught myself, I don"t know. I think it is a very lazy approach to teaching. I am a former Chalmers student and this course which is in the very first study period of the whole programme, is our university"s first academic impression to all exchange and other new students and it has to meet the expectations put on a course taught at a university of this reputation. I cannot write an essay here since the the text input window is too small on the course evaluation form and I will loose track of what I have written. To sum my impression of this course and translate it into some kind of feedback, would be to thoroughly rethink the contents and teaching approach for the course so the students actually get capable of using a CAD/CAT software in a realistic engineering situation. To finish this off with something positive, I think the tutorial in parametric modeling was good and to some extent also the tutorial in RD&T.» (Poor)
- It seems very strange that the exam, which purpose is vague, has 50% of the grade. I"d say skip the exam and make the project bigger and on a more advanced level.» (Fair)
- Would have liked more emphasis on how to construct parts in a good way, higher standards and less parts maybe» (Adequate)
- I wanted to learn the software CATIA, this part I think was good. I couldn´,t though see the reason for a lot of the content in the lctures. I have no use of learning about eg the pos and cons of a pair of VR glasses.» (Adequate)
- The exam is unnessecary since you dont learn anything, only memorizing bulletlist etc. And you dont even know what you are memorizing since you dont have any additional information. Even if you went to the lectures you did not get any additional information except from what was written on the slides. The lectures regarding RDT was good though.» (Adequate)
- I feel that I learnt a lot from the project. » (Good)

15. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- Depends on the goal of the course, but I believe the concept of the project can be preserved and improved.»
- project and extra tasks»
- the catia project»
- Assignment»
- The project»
- the project»
- The project»
- project»
- The project work»
- The project »
- Course Syllabus & Goals are good»
- the project can be easier, to learn basics of catia,»
- The FEA and Pipe/tube design must be serious consider to get more knowledge about it»
- The tasks»
- The extrapoints for higher grade»
- Project work»
- Catia project»
- The point system felt good and clear and structured. work more for a higher grade.»
- The project»
- The tutorial in parametric modeling.»
- The project work»

16. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- The exam should be either changed or completely removed. No CAD theory. More exercises that teach us how to do the tasks necessary for the project. Some insight in lectures. Separate project help and demonstration.»
- Little bit less focus on RDnT and make sure that the helpers know what they are doing.»
- The contents of the exam.»
- way of teaching (lectures)»
- the exam is useless. Have nothing to do with CAD.»
- Although it"s great to Geometry Assurance in the course, it"s unacceptable to have an application that first of all is very buggy (graphical problems on all chalmers computers), is poorly documented and which cad instructors barley know how to use themselves. Also many of the subjects brought up in the course feels like they were modern 15 years ago, In general the content of the course need to be up to date and make since otherwise it better not mention it at all ... »
- lectures could include more practical examples»
- I think the exam should be changed (or maybe removed). I learnt a lot more from the project. Would be better to make the project a bit "bigger" and skip the exam.»
- RD&T needs to be changed..some other application in catia itself would have been much better.»
- The instructions for the RDnT program. I managed to do the exercises, but I did not quite understand what I was doing and why (even though I did go to the lecture about it).»
- The exam seeing as it is pointless and irrelevant »
- Regarding Project we need some more time»
- learning RD&T is not possible in short time, maybewe teacher must introduce this software sooner in the class.»
- The RDnT content (ex. presentation, exercise, document) is not so clear, very hard to understand »
- Parametrization should be replace by knowledge ware as knowlwdge ware include the parametrization which very good»
- More information about the RD&T, that was really hard to understand.»
- couse exame»
- Increased duration of the project»
- That the models were supposed to be shown to teacher instead of upploaded to the server could be clearer. Also an space on a server could be used to keep the RD&T software since it is not installed on the computers. »
- The posibility to ask questions about the extra tasks. »
- Take away the exman or make it meaningful.»
- The self-teaching approach to the project. I say skip that kind of project and make sure the students know how to build their models in a clever way instead.»
- Computer graphics part of the course felt very shallow and unrelated to what was learned in the project and other parts of the course. »

17. Additional comments

- To compensate for the lack of final exam add more tasks to the project or add another project»
- Overall Opinion the entire course is very good and i"m really satisfied with that»
- If the publication of parts in same assembly is include then it will make student to think more for doing extra»
- Overall a very good course but the difference in help between the mandatory and extra task was BAD!»
- What happened to the rapid prototype? No info at all about when and where what i"ve seen.»

18. What master program do you attend?

39 svarande

Product development»27 69%
Systems, control and mechatronics»0 0%
Automotive engineering»7 17%
Industrial design engineering»1 2%
Advanced engineering materials»1 2%
Other»3 7%

Genomsnitt: 1.92

- Quality and Operations Management» (Other)
- Production Engineering» (Other)

Kursutvärderingssystem från