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.

Internal Combustion Engines, Advanced Course 2012, MTF225

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2012-05-22 - 2012-05-29
Antal svar: 17
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 45%
Kontaktperson: Petter Dahlander»
Utbildningsprogram som genomför enkäten: Maskinteknik 300 hp

Course administration and information

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

16 svarande

Not good»1 6%
Poor»0 0%
Ok»2 12%
Good»7 43%
Very good»6 37%

Genomsnitt: 4.06

- The goals of the course are not stated in the course PM» (Not good)
- Could be more detailed» (Ok)

2. Did you find the course web page satisfactory?

17 svarande

Not good»0 0%
Poor»0 0%
Ok»4 23%
Good»7 41%
Very good»6 35%

Genomsnitt: 4.11

- Hand outs from some lectures came up a little bit too late sometimes.» (Ok)

3. Was the course PM satisfactory?

17 svarande

Not good»0 0%
Poor»2 11%
Ok»1 5%
Good»6 35%
Very good»8 47%

Genomsnitt: 4.17

- No course goals.» (Poor)

Learning

4. Where the goals of the course fulfilled?

16 svarande

No»1 6%
Almost»3 18%
Yes»12 75%

Genomsnitt: 2.68

- No goals stated» (No)

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

17 svarande

Not at all, I missed a lot»0 0%
Yes»5 29%
Yes, definitely»12 70%

Genomsnitt: 2.7

- Took the ICE course in LP1 2011.» (Yes, definitely)

6. Which parts of the course were difficult/easy?

- Even though i think that the exam covered the most relevant parts of the course it was too similar to old exams. I think there were many points to be gained by just learning simple sentances without really understanding them. »
- optical measurement»
- Difficult: Optical measurement techniques»
- Engine modeling, optical measurement method»
- Difficult: optical measurement»
- Difficult - optical measurements. Quite comprehensive theoretical information and it would have been nice with some practical excercises (maybe visit to engine lab at Chalmers?)to be able to process the theory easier.»
- All were cool»
- Optical measurment»
- Not any specific. Perhaps the optical measurement lectures which were a bit abstract.»
- The most difficult was to be able to get a view what of the different concepts i.e. gdi, hcci was used and where in the real world.»

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

17 svarande

No»0 0%
Almost»4 23%
Yes»13 76%

Genomsnitt: 2.76

8. Did you find the course to be scheduled right in time in the global course plan?

17 svarande

Yes»15 88%
No, too early»0 0%
No, too late»2 11%

Genomsnitt: 1.23

9. Did you find the "suggested readings" uploaded to the web page helpful?

17 svarande

Yes»15 88%
No»2 11%

Genomsnitt: 1.11

- some topic were missing: future engines» (Yes)
- Very helpful and it was great when studying for the exam as a repetition of parts of the course.» (Yes)
- To Petters lectures» (Yes)

Lectures

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

17 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Poor»1 5%
Ok»4 23%
Good»8 47%
Very good»4 23%

Genomsnitt: 3.88

- Varying quality. Some lectures were really interesting and good while other like the alternative fuel lecture was dissapointing. » (Ok)
- hard to know what we should know from them...» (Ok)
- I would have like to skip the CFD and the optical measurement lectures which did not gave that much, focus more on the other areas.» (Ok)

11. How many lectures did you go to?

17 svarande

0-20%»1 5%
20-40%»0 0%
40-60%»3 17%
60-80%»2 11%
80-100%»11 64%

Genomsnitt: 4.29

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

- Assignments, especially in the parallell course advanced vehicle dynamics were very time consuming. »
- Out of the city and deadline accomplishments»
- Saving time for assignments, and nice weather at the end of the period.»
- Forumla student....»
- Working on the assignments.»
- CFS12»
- --»

13. How did you like the lectures by Petter Dahlander?

(Engine modeling, Sprays, Introduction to Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD), Development Trends CI Engines)

17 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Poor»0 0%
Ok»1 5%
Good»9 52%
Very good»7 41%

Genomsnitt: 4.35

- Ingine modeling was not clear enough in my opinion. Even after reading the book. » (Ok)
- Excellent lecturer» (Very good)
- Interesting and inspiring.» (Very good)
- Cool guy» (Very good)

14. How did you like the lectures by Arjan Helmantel?

(Gas exchange/charge motion, Engine operating characteristics)

17 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Poor»0 0%
Ok»3 17%
Good»9 52%
Very good»5 29%

Genomsnitt: 4.11

- He has good knowledge and explains rather good, but lectures tend to be boring» (Ok)
- His powerpoint slides are excellent even if it is hard to grasp everything during the lecture.» (Good)

15. How did you like the lectures by Monica Johansson?

(Alternative fuels)

16 svarande

Very poor»1 6%
Poor»1 6%
Ok»2 12%
Good»9 56%
Very good»3 18%

Genomsnitt: 3.75

16. How did you like the lectures by Mats Andersson?

(Optical measurement methods)

17 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Poor»1 5%
Ok»10 58%
Good»4 23%
Very good»2 11%

Genomsnitt: 3.41

- In my opinion it was not so interesting. Could maybe have been just one lecture and more brief.» (Ok)
- A lot of new techniques and technical terms so it was a bit hard to grasp everything at the lectures and as mentioned before: his lectures and topic would benefit from practical excersise/visit.» (Good)

17. How did you like the lectures by Sven Andersson?

(Diesel injection system and system overview)

16 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Poor»1 6%
Ok»3 18%
Good»7 43%
Very good»5 31%

Genomsnitt: 4

- Unfortunately he was ill and so everything was compressed in one lecture. Too much topic for few time and thus rushed.» (Poor)
- He was supposed to have two lectures that became one...» (Good)
- Sven rocks. He is the best.» (Very good)

18. How did you like the lectures by Anders Karlsson?

(Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) in industry)

15 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Poor»1 6%
Ok»7 46%
Good»5 33%
Very good»2 13%

Genomsnitt: 3.53

- did not attend» (?)
- Too much theory and too little applications» (Poor)

19. How did you like the lectures by Ingemar Denbratt?

(Supercharging & downsizing)

16 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Poor»0 0%
Ok»0 0%
Good»9 56%
Very good»7 43%

Genomsnitt: 4.43

- did not attend» (?)

Design task

20. What did you think about the design task as a whole?

17 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Poor»0 0%
Ok»2 11%
Good»6 35%
Very good»9 52%

Genomsnitt: 4.41

- I really liked the design task and I think it was very challanging to build an engine that fulfilled all the design constraints and in time were able to meet the target fuel consumption. I really put alot of time in this assignment and in the end I managed to design an engine that fulfilled all the goals and requirements. Since the task was not graded I was very suprised at the presentation day when almost everyone who presented clearly did not fulfill the requirements. I was dissapointed when I heard that everyone had passed even though they failed with their model (90 % chose the easiest one).» (Ok)
- It was rather easy to fulfill the design constraints and the target values. It could have been more demands on the engine like 4-valves/cylinder etc. The help was very good from Lars-Christian and Chen and we also did get a lot of time for the design tasks which also was good.» (Good)
- Well designed and described, the timing is perfectly fixed and it is really interesting to work with those type of software» (Very good)

21. How many GT-Power exercises did you go to?

17 svarande

0-20%»0 0%
20-40%»1 5%
40-60%»3 17%
60-80%»3 17%
80-100%»10 58%

Genomsnitt: 4.29

22. What did you think about the GT-Power software?

16 svarande

0-20%»0 0%
20-40%»0 0%
40-60%»1 6%
60-80%»4 25%
80-100%»11 68%

Genomsnitt: 4.62

- its a really good software» (?)
- Complex and a bit tricky sometime...?» (60-80%)
- Great software» (80-100%)
- Very intuitive and easy to start working with. Good tutorials and explanations, and very good support by supervisors.» (80-100%)

23. What did you think about Chen Huangs supervision?

17 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Poor»4 23%
Ok»3 17%
Good»6 35%
Very good»4 23%

Genomsnitt: 3.58

- She did not seem so much prepared or with enough knowledge on the task or the software» (Poor)
- As mentioned before Chen was very helpful and a good supervisor.» (Very good)

24. What did you think about Lars Christian Riis Johansen"s supervision?

17 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Poor»0 0%
Ok»0 0%
Good»4 23%
Very good»13 76%

Genomsnitt: 4.76

- Excellent, knows the software and the subject and explains well» (Very good)
- As mentioned before Lars Christian was very helpful and a good supervisor.» (Very good)

Course Literature

25. What did you think about the Heywood book?

17 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Poor»0 0%
Ok»6 35%
Good»6 35%
Very good»5 29%

Genomsnitt: 3.94

- It is old and many parts of the course is missing but it is good for our economy if we can use the same book as in the previous course.» (Ok)
- Good book despite of being old» (Good)

26. What did you think about the lecture handouts?

17 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Poor»1 5%
Ok»6 35%
Good»5 29%
Very good»5 29%

Genomsnitt: 3.82

- Some might need to be fixed to be more clear» (Ok)
- Great that they actually are handed out at the lecture occasion.» (Very good)

Your work

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

16 svarande

<15 h»2 12%
Ca 20 h»6 37%
Ca 25 h»5 31%
Ca 30 h»2 12%
> 35 h»1 6%

Genomsnitt: 2.62

The exam.

28. Do you think that the exam reflected the course well?

17 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Poor»1 5%
Ok»2 11%
Good»10 58%
Very good»4 23%

Genomsnitt: 4

- I think the questions are a little bit too specific. Maybe some more general questions trying to look for the knowledge of the student as a whole, not just on specific thing within the topics.» (Poor)
- The exam covered the material but it was a bit too much copy paste in the exams as mentioned above. » (Ok)
- No surprises, and relevant questions.» (Very good)

Summary

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

17 svarande

Very poor»0 0%
Poor»0 0%
Ok»2 11%
Good»9 52%
Very good»6 35%

Genomsnitt: 4.23

- It was good, although I must say I expecged a bit more from it.» (Good)
- As a complement to the ICE course in LP1 it was excellent. A lot of stuff that I didn"t fully understood during that course, I did in this one and a lot thanks to the assignments and tasks/questions related to those.» (Very good)

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

- The design task. »
- GT-Power assignments.»
- The assignments.»
- All»
- Turbocharging & Supercharging Engine modelling»
- The design tasks.»
- The Assignments»

31. What should be changed for next year?

- The design task should be graded, 50% design task and 50 % exam. »
- Is it possible to add laboratory hands-on work? It is always a nice complement, and helps a lot in the learning process. And you have some engines available.»
- More details on Engine modeling»
- Visit to lab as a complement to optical measurements lecture. Maybe try to choose assignments to be presented so that it is not only one type of car five times in a row. (Of course dependent on if everyone choose the same car or not.)»
- NOthing»
- Alternative fuel Optical measurment»
- Maybe some more requirements on the second design task though.»
- More applications of different concepts »

32. General comments

- Very glad that I took this course and I will definitely recommend it to next years students.»
- It"s ok!»

Kursutvärderingssystem från