Visa resultat

Engineering Design and Optimization, PPU190

1. Which masters programme in mechanical engineering are you currently enrolled in?

Applied Mechanics»		4		21%
Automotive Engineering»		7		36%
Product Development»		8		42%
Another programme»		0		0%
Erasmus»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.21

2. How many hours per week did you spend on this course?

19 svarande

At most 15 hours/week»		2		10%
Around 20 hours/week»		8		42%
Around 25 hours/week»		6		31%
Around 30 hours/week»		3		15%
At least 35 hours/week»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 2.52

- The work load was high compared to other courses, but manageable.» (Around 25 hours/week)

Course aim and learning objectives

3. To which extent do you consider that the course reaches its aim?

19 svarande

Not at all»		0		0%
To some extent»		2		10%
Satisfactorily»		7		36%
To a large extent»		6		31%
Perfectly»		4		21%

Genomsnitt: 3.63

- More optimization and problem solving with this. Less "engineering design" which is trying to fit everything into one course» (To some extent)
- In my mind, there is no such thing as perfect, but the home assignements with a competition side were very motivating and made me to work hard with new optimization tools.» (To a large extent)

4. How do you rate your ability to master the complete development chain including modeling-analyses-test-evaluation?

19 svarande

Not at all»		0		0%
Partially»		2		10%
Most of it»		12		63%
Fully»		5		26%

Genomsnitt: 3.15

- The feeling I got from the class was that I still have alot to learn, but I can also already contribute to a pretty sophisticated development process. I felt that I have made a good start in becoming a high level engineer.» (Partially)
- Matlab was difficult. » (Most of it)
- This was known before the course» (Fully)

5. How well do you perceive that you have developed the knowledge, understanding and skills that are stated in the course learning outcomes

Matrisfråga

- Note that this is how I rate my skill level AFTER taking the course. Most of these abilities were substantially lower before.»

Identify areas for improvement in a new or an existing product design.
19 svarande

1 (Poor)»		0		0%
2»		2		10%
3»		5		26%
4»		11		57%
5 (Expert)»		1		5%

Genomsnitt: 3.57

Identify and choose appropriate material alternatives for a product.
19 svarande

1 (Poor)»		0		0%
2»		1		5%
3»		8		42%
4»		8		42%
5 (Expert)»		2		10%

Genomsnitt: 3.57

Apply previously-learned design methods and tools to practical problems.
19 svarande

1 (Poor)»		0		0%
2»		0		0%
3»		4		21%
4»		10		52%
5 (Expert)»		5		26%

Genomsnitt: 4.05

Create appropriate simulation models of the design problem.
19 svarande

1 (Poor)»		0		0%
2»		2		10%
3»		7		36%
4»		9		47%
5 (Expert)»		1		5%

Genomsnitt: 3.47

Use Computer Aided Engineering (CAE) tools to design and simulate product performance.
18 svarande

1 (Poor)»		0		0%
2»		2		11%
3»		3		16%
4»		8		44%
5 (Expert)»		5		27%

Genomsnitt: 3.88

Formulate design optimization problems based on project or product requirements.
19 svarande

1 (Poor)»		0		0%
2»		1		5%
3»		4		21%
4»		11		57%
5 (Expert)»		3		15%

Genomsnitt: 3.84

Apply numerical optimization techniques and computer tools to solve optimization problems.
18 svarande

1 (Poor)»		0		0%
2»		4		22%
3»		3		16%
4»		7		38%
5 (Expert)»		4		22%

Genomsnitt: 3.61

Interpret optimization results for design decision making (e.g., material choice, geometry, manufacturing, production).
19 svarande

1 (Poor)»		0		0%
2»		1		5%
3»		7		36%
4»		9		47%
5 (Expert)»		2		10%

Genomsnitt: 3.63

Create CAE drawings for use with three-dimensional printing tools.
19 svarande

1 (Poor)»		1		5%
2»		1		5%
3»		4		21%
4»		6		31%
5 (Expert)»		7		36%

Genomsnitt: 3.89

Iterate on design solutions to continually improve a product.
19 svarande

1 (Poor)»		0		0%
2»		2		10%
3»		4		21%
4»		9		47%
5 (Expert)»		4		21%

Genomsnitt: 3.78

Communicate design solutions, including rationales for a given choice, advantages, and disadvantages over alternatives.
19 svarande

1 (Poor)»		0		0%
2»		0		0%
3»		9		47%
4»		8		42%
5 (Expert)»		2		10%

Genomsnitt: 3.63

6. Are the learning objectives reasonable considering your background and the number of credits?

No, the objectives are set too low»		2		10%
Yes, the objections are reasonable»		15		78%
No, the objectives are set too high»		2		10%

Genomsnitt: 2

7. Did the examination (midterm, final exam and projects) assess whether you have reached the objectives?

No, not at all»		1		5%
To some extent»		9		47%
Yes, definitely»		9		47%

Genomsnitt: 2.42

- There were some things that were not practiced or explained to full extent in lectures, but were still in exam and mid-term. For example, the dervation of sensitivity.» (To some extent)

8. Do you appreiciate this form of continuous examination?

19 svarande

No, not at all»		0		0%
Somewhat»		1		5%
Yes»		6		31%
Yes definetely»		12		63%

Genomsnitt: 3.57

- Continiuos examination is keeping the motivation up.» (Yes definetely)

9. Do your course grade (Fail, 3, 4, 5) reflect your knowledge in your opinion?

Small extent»		2		10%
Some extent»		7		36%
Large extent»		10		52%

Genomsnitt: 2.42

- Too easy to get good grades, particularly low demands on the projects» (Small extent)
- I got a 5 so I must be an expert.» (Large extent)

Teaching and Content

10. In your opinion, what course content would have been valuable to have spent more time on?

Rangordningsfråga. Siffran anger medelposition.

1.		Structural optimization		2.4
2.		Training of CAE-tools		2.8
3.		Optimization theory		3
4.		Product design		3.7
5.		Material selection		3.8
6.		Sustainability and Robust design		4.7

- Robustness of design (optimization) important, but sustainability did not fit well with the course. » (?)
- - Would be good to have some class excersises about optimization theory and how to calculate with it. -Would be good to have the information about topology optimization a little bit earlier. » (?)
- Product design as esthetics would be a subject of another class in my mind.» (?)

11. Relevance to sustainablility

To what extent do you perceive that sustainablity aspects were included in course content?
18 svarande

1 (Very low)»		0		0%
2»		4		22%
3»		9		50%
4»		4		22%
5 (Very high)»		1		5%

Genomsnitt: 3.11

To what extent have you developed competences and skills that you believe are important for developing sustainable products and systems in your future career?
17 svarande

1 (Very low)»		1		5%
2»		2		11%
3»		7		41%
4»		6		35%
5 (Very high)»		1		5%

Genomsnitt: 3.23

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

Small extent»		1		5%
Some extent»		3		15%
Large extent»		10		52%
Great extent»		5		26%

Genomsnitt: 3

- It was of good help but because of the large amount of information a lot is forgotten and extensive self studies has to be done to even remember some. » (Some extent)
- Steven and Evertsson» (Large extent)
- The lectures was exceptional» (Great extent)

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

Very poor»		0		0%
Rather poor»		0		0%
Rather good»		5		26%
Very good»		14		73%
I did not seek help»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 3.73

- Teachers were very helpfull if you went to their offica and asked. » (Very good)

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

Very poorly»		0		0%
Rather poorly»		1		5%
Rather well»		3		15%
Very well»		15		78%
I did not seek cooperation»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 3.73

- Group tasks were a lot of fun.» (Very well)

15. How was the balance between lectures, project work, workshops and guest lectures?

Poor balance»		1		5%
Balance was acceptable»		6		31%
Good balance»		12		63%

Genomsnitt: 2.57 (bidrar till totalt genomsnitt/jämförelseindex)

16. In your opinion, what teaching/learning acitivty would have been valuable to have spent more time on?

1.		Problem solving exercises		2.1
2.		Workshop/Tutorials		3.2
3.		Supervised project sessions		3.3
4.		Project work		3.5
5.		Lectures		3.8
6.		Guest lectures		4.8

- MATLAB workshops with problem solving was a very good complement to the lectures» (?)
- actually, I feel that the project tasks were too big for the given amount of time and credits. Think that the project (especually project 2) should be smaller. the Workshops were many but also very good. » (?)

17. What is your impression of the Project assignment 1 (Cantilever Challange)?

Very valuable»		10		52%
Valuable»		8		42%
Of minor value»		1		5%
Unnecessary»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1.52

- Good, but could have been allocated less time» (Valuable)
- Nice to learn some new CAE tools. But would be even more valuable if you used some CAD integrated optimization tool (for example Ansys Opt tool). That lecture/info came too late. » (Valuable)
- Fun to try "real deal", however competition event rather lengthy. Mre complex gemetry, better CAE trainging.» (Of minor value)

18. What is your impression of the Project assignment 2 (Materials selection and design optimization)?

Very valuable»		6		31%
Valuable»		9		47%
Of minor value»		4		21%
Unnecessary»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1.89

- More time would be good, more project proposals and with more known parameters of current solutions (materials in particular)» (Valuable)
- Learning Ansys, good. Much more clear assignmnet descritpion needed.» (Valuable)
- Too big project and also hard to apply the mathematical optimization theory fully, due to complex product geometry. » (Valuable)
- A lot of time had to be spent on this project, more than project 1 and 3 together, and it gives less credits than the other two.» (Of minor value)
- Second assignement was a dit vague.» (Of minor value)

19. What is your impression of the Project assignment 3 (Adams multi-body dynamic optimization)?

Very valuable»		6		31%
Valuable»		9		47%
Of minor value»		4		21%
Unnecessary»		0		0%

Genomsnitt: 1.89

- really nice to get in contact with a new and very valuable software. Also liked the idea with A3 reports. » (Very valuable)
- Better tutorials!!!» (Very valuable)
- Presenation in minor groups very lenghy and unstructured.» (Valuable)
- Adams was a very good tool to get to know. Vehicle dynamics are hard!» (Valuable)
- Mostly a ADAMS tutorial, only good for learning ADAMS, but not any knowledge towards optimization. Would be better to stick with one commercial CAE which is more known such as ANSYS. » (Of minor value)
Genomsnitt totalt för detta stycke: 2.57

Summarizing questions

20. Do you think the course outcome will help you in your future career as automitive engineer/product developer/CAE engineer?

Not at all»		0		0%
To a little extent»		1		5%
To some extent»		7		38%
To a large extent»		10		55%
No opinion»		1

Genomsnitt: 3.5

- Have got an overview of some really useful CAE tools and opportunities.» (To a large extent)

21. Did you interact or work together with students from another masters programme or specialization than your own?

Yes»		16		84%
No»		3		15%

Genomsnitt: 1.15

22. In commercial product development projects, it is customary to work in cross-disciplinary teams with engineers with different specialist competences. To what extent was this reflected in the course?

Very low»		1		5%
Low»		1		5%
Moderate»		14		73%
High»		3		15%

Genomsnitt: 3

- We were just two students in each group so I dont think it reflected the reality so much, but sure to some extent. » (Moderate)
- This is hard to do at school. We would need advanced theoretical lectures corresponding to our own specialaty and practical assignments together.» (Moderate)

23. What is your general impression of the course?

Poor»		1		5%
Fair»		0		0%
Adequate»		2		10%
Good»		8		42%
Excellent»		8		42%

Genomsnitt: 4.15

- Very good intention, but contents should be more focused and demands higher. » (Adequate)
- Overall the course was very interesting and is a course I recomend other to take. But because all the different subjects it gets a bit messy.» (Good)
- Really nice with all of the workshops and CAE tools. » (Good)
- Excellent course with a lot of material that was totally new to me.» (Excellent)
- This is by far the most useful course I have taken at Chalmers. When I signed up for the course I was not quite sure what to expect, but I am so glad that I did. This course has given me valuable knowledge about evaluating designs in so many different ways than I would have thought optimization applied to. Before taking this course I did not know exactly where optimization applied, but now I see how it can be used in ALL of my other coursework, for one thing or another. Last study period I also took Materials Selection and Design because I thought this course would go more in depth into the materials aspect of optimization. I was very unhappy after completing that course to find out that the entire study period of that course was basically covered in the first 3-4 weeks of Engineering Design and Optimization. The EDO course largely makes the Materials Selection and Design course obsolete. It took an extremely marginal effort on my part to get a 5 in the Materials course after having taken EDO. The ability to understand objective functions and constraints has opened my eyes to many new possibilities for engineering. I have just started with my thesis project at Volvo where we are tasked with solving a complex function with 120 different coefficients to a set of measured data (with lots of noise) from a vehicle. Many of these coefficients have upper and lower bounds, and there are several constraint functions that need to be evaluated. Traditional Matlab fit functions were not working at all (only finding local minima, resulting in horrible correlation), but because of my knowledge of optimization I was able to implement a genetic algorithm solver that has been producing surprisingly good results (much better than what was thought possible in the outline of the thesis). The information that I learned from the EDO class will be used throughout my career as an engineer, this I am sure of.» (Excellent)

24. What should definitely be changed to next year?

25. What should definitely be preserved to next year?

26. Additional comments