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.

Road Vehicle Aerodynamics, MTF235

Status: Avslutad
Öppen för svar: 2008-03-03 - 2008-03-24
Antal svar: 39
Procent av deltagarna som svarat: 76%
Kontaktperson: David Söderblom»
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.

39 svarande

At most 10 hours/week» 10 25%

Around 15 hours/week» 18 46%

Around 20 hours/week» 10 25%

Around 25 hours/week» 1 2%

At least 30 hours/week» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.05

- Project leader formula student frame!» (At most 10 hours/week)
- Spended to little time since the Hybrid course took more time than was reasonable.» (Around 15 hours/week)

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

39 svarande

0%» 0 0%

25%» 0 0%

50%» 2 5%

75%» 13 33%

100%» 24 61%

Genomsnitt: 4.56

- above 90%» (100%)
- I can"t see the reason for having mandatory guest lectures and 100% attendance at the presentations...?» (100%)
- (90%)» (100%)
- almost 100%» (100%)
- Few guest lecturers were good» (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.

3. How understandable are the course goals?

39 svarande

I have not seen/read the goals» 7 17%

The goals are difficult to understand» 2 5%

The goals give some guidance, but could be clearer» 16 41%

The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn» 14 35%

Genomsnitt: 2.94

- On the homepage it said that the course should be about passenger cars, racing cars and commercial vehicles. Im most intrested in commercial vehicles and I did not see much about that in the course. » (The goals clearly describe what I am supposed to learn)

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» 6 17%

Yes, the goals seem reasonable» 28 80%

No, the goals are set too high» 1 2%

Genomsnitt: 1.85

Teaching and course administration

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

39 svarande

Small extent» 4 10%

Some extent» 16 41%

Large extent» 12 30%

Great extent» 7 17%

Genomsnitt: 2.56

- Not very good slides. Just a picture on a car on a slide is not enough! You will have to write some text to describe what"s important with that picture!» (Some extent)
- Barnard is a rather easy and not deep going book» (Some extent)
- The book was a little bit to basic and could have gone more into details since most of us already have had a basic course in fluid mechanics» (Some extent)
- The course book has many errors and does not fit well with some of the other material provided in the course. Considering its a second edition the CFD section is completely dated and would recommend a search for new literature. » (Some extent)
- the course content with respect to slides where fine but the book it was pretty much less and has more of history which seems to be useful but at the same time some practical experiment will help a lot» (Some extent)
- Barnard book is good» (Large extent)
- Course book is good for elemantary aerodyanmics studies» (Large extent)
- the course litterature brings much more knowledeges than the lectures» (Great extent)
- The book was very useful in terms of understanding the concepts.» (Great extent)

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

39 svarande

Very badly» 0 0%

Rather badly» 2 5%

Rather well» 27 69%

Very well» 10 25%

Genomsnitt: 3.2

- were not one time at the initial stage but got them later, would be best if we get them immediately on the same day of lecture.» (Rather well)

Study climate

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

39 svarande

Very poor» 0 0%

Rather poor» 0 0%

Rather good» 13 33%

Very good» 23 58%

I did not seek help» 3 7%

Genomsnitt: 3.74

- the assistants and the tutor are pretty much helpful on time» (Rather good)
- The assistants were very helpful, thanks a lot!» (Very good)
- David has been very helpful!» (Very good)
- Very good course assistants that helped when ever you needed it» (Very good)
- thank you david and christoffer for your availability» (Very good)

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

39 svarande

Very poorly» 1 2%

Rather poorly» 3 7%

Rather well» 17 43%

Very well» 18 46%

I did not seek cooperation» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 3.33

- Language problems» (Rather poorly)

9. How was the course workload?

39 svarande

Too low» 1 2%

Low» 10 25%

Adequate» 28 71%

High» 0 0%

Too high» 0 0%

Genomsnitt: 2.69

- Except the project, there could be a few short theoretical exercises about the concepts.» (Adequate)

Summarizing questions

10. What is your general impression of the course?

39 svarande

Poor» 6 15%

Fair» 5 12%

Adequate» 13 33%

Good» 13 33%

Excellent» 2 5%

Genomsnitt: 3

- Too much "basic" facts around aerodynamics. I could definately see som more math exercises and perhaps some introduction to CFD.» (Fair)
- A bit to much of a "playground" or "kindergarden" course. Could have been more advenced.» (Fair)
- Weird focus on just the sport cars, even if the course were said to handle commercial vehicles and passenger cars to an equal amount.» (Adequate)
- Keep to one subject, would have been better to have a more theoretical aproach rather than a "historical" mixed one.» (Good)
- If there was a basic CFD project together with the wind tunnel test it would be very useful. The wind tunnel test took more time than it should have taken. » (Good)
- Best course at Chalmers this far» (Excellent)

11. What is your impression of the lectures?

39 svarande

Poor» 6 15%

Fair» 10 25%

Adequate» 7 17%

Good» 12 30%

Excellent» 4 10%

Genomsnitt: 2.94

- The lectures contained the same stuff and pictures over and over again... And they contained too much information about "interesting sports cars" and its drivers... I don"t really care what their name was, the drivers at the 50"s... » (Poor)
- Same things many times, unnesessary, like an eight week discovery show» (Fair)
- The non guest lectures consisted to a great amount of the Barnard book content» (Fair)
- Not that rewarding since I got the feeling of just looking at pictures of old sports cars that were either good or bad designs. As said above, somewhat of a kindergarden feeling about it.» (Fair)
- Too many slides with bad pictures of old sport cars, which are not important for the course. » (Fair)
- lectures are good, but they contained too many old cars only. we would also like to hear some more comparion from moden cars.» (Fair)
- To much history (ok you learn from history but then I rather want to know what to learn... theory thanx)» (Adequate)
- Need to be improved in terms of some desing or mathematics» (Adequate)
- more on history» (Adequate)
- But please, Start the lectures in time! It is very annoying when the lectures starts 10-15 minutes late every time.» (Good)
- Concepts were very interesting. Instead of the examples from the book, more modern examples could be given at least in the lectures.» (Good)

12. What is your impression of the guest lectures?

39 svarande

Poor» 1 2%

Fair» 5 12%

Adequate» 7 17%

Good» 18 46%

Excellent» 8 20%

Genomsnitt: 3.69

- The guest lectures were qiute poor (except for the Audi guy, but that content wasn"t a part of the course...) The guy from Scania was really good, bur the Saab guy was not good at all!» (Fair)
- Baretzky and Hucho were great. Two living legends...» (Adequate)
- Loose knowledge - the same as you get from Discovery or the history channel ... the guy who talked about CFD was good but then again we havn"t really studied CFD so the bar was kinda high.» (Adequate)
- Many guest lectures talk about the same thing. » (Adequate)
- Too many.» (Good)
- however the Audi one did not fit too well. From what the Consultant CFD guest lecturer said it would probably have been more beneficial to us to find out if Prodrive could have come over for a little chat about the Aston Martin Le Mans car. » (Excellent)

13. How would you rate the project work?

39 svarande

Poor» 1 2%

Fair» 4 10%

Adequate» 13 33%

Good» 17 43%

Excellent» 4 10%

Genomsnitt: 3.48

- It could be of more useful if we simulate our results with some software package» (Fair)
- A bit to little time to do the actual lab. Could have been 4-6 hours instead» (Adequate)
- Fun to be in the wind tunnel and see the actual flow pattern. Keep it for next year! May want to extend the time from 2 to 4 hours or divide it so that the student get time to "play around" with different settings.» (Adequate)
- It was fun to work in the wind tunnel. And it was also very good that all groups had different tasks.» (Good)
- working with the wind tunnel gave a good idea about how complicated RVAD testing can be. » (Good)
- In terms of understanding the concepts it was OK, but it could be completed in a shorter time and a CFD assignment could be given.» (Good)
- The wind tunnel laboratory experiment was a really good task! » (Excellent)

14. What did you think about the project layout?

How would you rate the project layout with pre-study, wind tunnel laboration, report and presentation?

39 svarande

Poor» 1 2%

Fair» 5 12%

Adequate» 9 23%

Good» 18 46%

Excellent» 6 15%

Genomsnitt: 3.58

- In my eyes it"s impolite of the teacher to miss 3 presentations unexplained and disturbe another one by being 20 minutes late. » (Adequate)
- But instead of that all presentations are mandetory, it whould have been enough to go at your own presentaion date.» (Good)
- See Q13» (Good)
- Learned a lot from listening to the other groups and the discussion,actually.» (Good)
- Prety nice» (Good)
- It was very useful.» (Good)
- Very good!» (Excellent)

15. How would you rate the wind tunnel laboratory work?

39 svarande

Poor» 1 2%

Fair» 3 7%

Adequate» 13 33%

Good» 16 41%

Excellent» 6 15%

Genomsnitt: 3.58

- To little time» (Adequate)
- See Q13» (Adequate)
- Need more time for the laboratory work. Time is quite limited and adequate to conduct all the experiments» (Adequate)
- more time would be nice» (Adequate)
- too short time in the windtunnel» (Good)
- Time limit made things difficult.» (Good)
- it will be excellent if we could have some more time and get clearer answer for wind tunnel problems.» (Good)

16. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

- Project work and wind tunnel»
- windtunnel lab»
- The wind tunnel laboratory»
- the wind tunnel laboratory experiment!»
- the windtunnel and guest lectures»
- the laboratory project»
- The project work»
- The very interesting guest lectures of Ulrich Baretzky and Wolf-Heinrich Hucho.»
- Guest lectures and prestudy.»
- Laboratory experiments»
- the laboratory project»
- Wind Tunnel»
- Wind tunnel laboratory!»
- Guest lectures and text book»
- Gästföreläsarna!»
- The laboratory experiment. And add some extercise with CFD.»
- Guest lectures, project work and the book.»
- guest lectures, and wind tunnel test.»
- The project work and the guest lectures»

17. What should definitely be changed to next year?

- Course Structure Course Book»
- 1 or 2 guest lectures could maybe be skipped»
- It might be good if you could learn something during the lectures and not just look at pictures of different cars»
- Some more math exercise Basic introduction to CFD»
- the content of the lectures...»
- more time for proyect, more specific and deep lectures on the relation between fluid mechanics and aerodynamics»
- the lectures»
- The focus of the course, not just sports cars. The slides should also be updated with text and not just 100 pictures of old sports cars.»
- I"m of the opinion that there should be a presentation feedback after the presentations. In my eyes it"s not useful to have a presentation when nobody gives a feedback about the mistakes and what could have been better! Furthermore I think that it"s not useful to say after each presentation that it was wonderful and don"t mention the possible improvements (and there were a lot!). My opinion is that this helps no one to improve his/her presentation techniques.»
- The time in the lab and some more content in the lectures.»
- Guest lectures must be relevent to the cousre.»
- There sould be some software packages included in our course project so it could be of great use in validating our results.»
- the lake of knowledges in lectures»
- Models tested, Literature possibly as it is out of date. »
- More theory or "hands on" teaching about how a diffuser actually works, different settings, optimal for this that car... More detail and less fussy pictures and history.»
- Some industrial work and little bit know how to computational software is the cfd field... Although it is a push the button technique»
- Föreläsningarna måste bli tydligare! För mkt fina bilder utan att man förstår vitsen med dem. En del bilar var tydligen bra och en del dåliga.. och? Det säger ju inget om man inte jämför den organiserat så man förstår skillnaden!»
- The examiners personal interest of old racing cars are should not take time from the lectures. »
- An additional CFD assignment can be good.»
- add more new things on aerodynamics design than telling cars mostly from 60s. »
- please try to reduce the more topics on history and also try to arrange for a wind tunnel trip to Volvo which seems to be a better option to all»

18. Additional comments

- More CFD»
- the content of the lecture is poor, I didn"t learn anything at all»
- It was an interesting course! Too bad that we were not able to go to the Volvo Wind tunnel.»
- Going to take the advanced CFD course but not due to this course. Nice that Hucho could come - really enjoyed that!!»
- Ett intressant ämne som man skulle kunna få ut mycket mer av på en 7.5 poängskurs! Det ska motsvara ett halvtidsjobb i 10 veckor och det är det inte i närheten av.»
- What is said on the schedule on the homepage is not the same as what is said in the lectures. The course is dominating by the racing cars, which I think is not said in the schedule and in the goals.»
- the summary after every lecture could be desired, since aerodynamics design is a conbination of many tiny aspects.»
- Nothing so special please try to implement the above mentioned things for next year.»

Kursutvärderingssystem från