Roger Mayne

Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering

University at BuffaloState University of New York

Application of Continuous Improvement to an Undergraduate

Mechanical Engineering Program

Summary

• About UB and ME at UB• Current BSME program• Accreditation in the U.S.• Continuous improvement approach• Surveying students and alumni• Program revision• Follow on survey results

• Industry problems for design projects

Background Information

UB is part of the State University of New York

(4 university campuses, 20 colleges)

An suburban campus of about 24,000 students

Wide range of undergraduate programs, full graduate spectrum - medicine, law, etc.

Engineering school offers BS, MS and PhD programs in Aerospace, Chemical, Civil, Computer, Electrical, Industrial and Mechanical Engineering

The Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Department22 - 25 faculty members

Research in materials, mechanics, fluid-thermal sciences, design, system dynamics

Graduating 120 - 150 BS students per year

35 - 50 MS students and 8 - 12 PhDs

20 - 25 percent of our students are pursuing Aerospace degrees or dual degrees

Basic BSME Program• Relatively typical BSME• Math (4 courses)• Physics, chemistry (4 courses)• Engineering fundamentals (7 courses)

– drawing, programming, thermo, statics, dynamics, strength, EE concepts

• Mechanical engineering (9 courses)– instrumentation, dynamic systems, fluids,

heat transfer, machines, mechanisms, materials, materials II, thermo II

Basic Program (cont.)

• Design (2 courses)– design process, senior design

• Laboratories (5 courses)– instrumentation, 2 materials, fluids/heat,

systems• Electives (6 courses)

– three technical, two applied math, one free• General education (8 courses)

– 2 english, 6 social science

A Few Semesters First Year (Freshman)

Fall SpringChemistry 1 4 Calculus 2 4Calculus 1 4 Physics 1 4Intro. Engineering 3 Intro. Drawing 2English 1 3 English 2 3Gen Ed 1 3 Gen Ed 2 3

17 16

Fourth Year (Senior)

Fall SpringThermo 2 3 Senior Design 4

Machines 2 3 App Math 2 3 Design Proc 2 TE 3 3TE 1 3 Gen Ed 6 3TE 2 3 Free Elective 3Gen Ed 5 3 16

17Total 134

Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology

• Known as “ABET”• Federation of thirty one engineering and

technical societies - including ASME, IEEE, ASCE, SME, AIChE, ASEE, etc.

• Accredits over 2400 programs in engineering and technology at more than 500 colleges and universities across the U.S.

Comments on Accreditation

• For students– an accredited degree is the first step

toward becoming a registered professional engineer

• For engineering programs– validates the quality of the program for

university administration and government– an important factor in recruiting new

students

ABET 2000

• Major change in philosophy in the 1990’s• Accreditation had led to over specification • US engineering programs were becoming

very similar• ABET 2000 based on objectives, outcomes

and assessment• Our interpretation of the original ABET 2000

is the basis for this talk• ABET is now on a new highly (excessively?)

controlled path

Basic Strategy

• Faculty define goals• Develop knowledge and skill statements• Obtain feedback on appropriateness of

knowledge and skill statements• Survey for importance of particular

knowledge and skill items• Use focus groups for clarification• Continually improve program

Highlights of the Knowledge Statement

• Mathematics/sciences

• Mechanics

• Materials science

• Thermodynamics

• Heat transfer

• Fluid mechanics

• System dynamics

• Machines/mechanisms

• Design

• Manufacturing

• Numerical computations

• Exposure to practice

• Professionalism, ethics, society, environment

Highlights of the Skills Statement

• Product design and realization

• Math modeling• CAD modeling and

tools• Sound engineering

judgement

• Choose and evaluate materials

• Choose and evaluate manufacturing processes

• Communication skills• Ability to work in teams

The Initial Survey• Graduating seniors

– Classes of 1999 and 2000 (~60% response)• Alumni

– Classes of 1994 - 1998 (~20 % overall response)

• Comments requested on goals• Knowledge and skills rated by

– Importance to career (Scale of 1- 5)– Importance given at UB (Scale of 1- 5)

0 1 2 3 4 5

Thermodynamics

Fluid Mechanics

Heat Transfer

Numerical Comps.

System Dynamics

Materials Science

Sciences

Manufacturing

Prof./Eth./Soc./Env.

Mathematics

Machines & Mechs.

Mechanics

Design

Exposure to Practice

0 1 2 3 4 5

Prof./Eth./Soc./Env.

Manufacturing

Exposure to Practice

Design

System Dynamics

Fluid Mechanics

Numerical Comps.

Thermodynamics

Heat Transfer

Materials Science

Sciences

Machines & Mechs.

Mechanics

Mathematics

Manufacturing

Exp to PracticeDesign

MechanicsMach & Mechs

MathPro/Eth/So/EnManufacturing

SciencesMatls Science

Heat Transfer

System Dyn

Fluid Mech

Num Comps

Thermo

Exp to PracticeDesign

MechanicsMach & Mechs

Math

Pro/Eth/So/En

SciencesMatls Science

Heat Transfer

System DynFluid Mech

Num CompsThermo

ME Career Importance UB Importance

Knowledge Survey ResultsGraduating Seniors (1999 and 2000)

To Simplify

The term “Shortfall” is used to combine the two importance measures where (for example):

Knowledge shortfall (percent) =

UB Importance

ME Importance - UB Importance100 X

0 25 50 75 100

Thermodynamics

Heat Transfer

Sciences

Mathematics

Fluid Mechanics

MaterialsScience

Num. Comps.

Mechanics

Machines/Mechs.

Sys. Dynamics

Design

Manufacturing

Prof//Eth/Soc/Env

Exp. to Practice

(Imp - UB Imp)/UB Imp

Knowledge Shortfall - Percent

Knowledge Survey ResultsGraduating Seniors (1999 and 2000)

Knowledge Survey ResultsAlumni (1994 – 1998)

-25 0 25 50 75 100

Thermodynamics

Num. Comps.

Sciences

Mathematics

Fluid Mechanics

Heat Transfer

Sys. Dynamics

Mechanics

MaterialsScience

Machines/Mechs.

Prof//Eth/Soc/Env

Design

Manufacturing

Exp. to Practice

Knowledge Shortfall - Percent

(Imp - UB Imp)/UB Imp

Skill Survey ResultsGraduating Seniors (1999 and 2000)

0 25 50 75

Math Modeling

Choose/Eval. Materials

Ability to Work in Teams

Product Design and Realization

Judg. for Eng. Decisions

CAD Modeling and Tools

Choose/Eval. Mfg. Processes

Communication Skills

(Imp - UB Imp)/UB Imp

Skill Shortfall - Percent

Distributions

• Well behaved• No signs of bimodal distributions• Examples from the Alumni survey

follow

CAD Tools and Modeling

0

20

40

-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4

Choose and Evaluate Manufacturing

Processes

0

20

40

-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4

Math Modeling

0

20

40

-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4

Skill Survey

Alumni (1994 - 1998)

Typical Shortfall Histograms

Survey Conclusions

• Graduating seniors and alumni generally agree• Traditional knowledge areas reasonably covered• Weaknesses in

– exposure to practice, manufacturing– design, prof/ethics/env/society

• More focus on skills, especially– communications skills– CAD, manufacturing processes

Changes to the Program (2001)

• Introductory Drawing & CAD (Year 1)– Now offered directly by MAE and no longer shared

• Introduction to ME Practice (Year 2)– New course: design projects, reverse engineering,

communication• Manufacturing Processes (Year 3)

– Traditional course in manufacturing • Design using CAD (Year 3)

– Mechanical design projects using AutoCad and ProE• Design Processes (Year 4)

– Original course is expanded• Senior Design (Year 4)

– Course revised and reorganized

Changes to the Program (cont.)

• Formerly required, now electives– Thermodynamics II– Machines and Mechanisms II– Materials II– Materials II Lab

Survey History To Date

• Graduating seniors (Classes of 1999 and 2000)• Alumni of 1994 - 1998(conducted in 2000)

Surveys before program revision

• Graduating seniors (Classes of 2001 thru 2007)• Alumni of 2000 – 2004 (conducted in 2006)

Continuing surveys since revision

Career Importance Plots

0

1

2

3

4

5

Exp

. to

Pra

ctic

e

De

sig

n

Me

cha

nic

s

Ma

chin

es/

Me

chs.

Ma

the

ma

tics

Pro

f//E

th/S

oc/

En

v

Ma

nu

fact

uri

ng

Sci

en

ces

Ma

teri

als

Sci

en

ce

Sys

. D

yna

mic

s

Nu

m.

Co

mp

s.

He

at

Tra

nsf

er

Flu

id M

ech

an

ics

Th

erm

od

yna

mic

s

1999/2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

0

1

2

3

4

5

Ab

ility to

Wo

rk in

Te

am

s

Ju

dg

. fo

r E

ng

.

De

cis

ion

s

Co

mm

un

ica

tio

n

Skills

Pro

du

ct D

esig

n

an

d R

ea

liza

tio

n

CA

D M

od

elin

g

an

d T

oo

ls

Ch

oo

se

/Eva

l.

Ma

teri

als

Ch

oo

se

/Eva

l.

Mfg

. P

roce

sse

s

Ma

th M

od

elin

g

1999/2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

Knowledge Career Importance

Skill Career Importance

UB Program Importance

0

1

2

3

4

5

Math

em

atic

s

Mechanic

s

Machin

es/M

echs.

Scie

nces

Mate

rials

Scie

nce

Heat T

ransfe

r

Therm

odynam

ics

Num

. C

om

ps.

Flu

id M

echanic

s

Sys. D

ynam

ics

Desig

n

Exp. to

Pra

ctic

e

Manufa

ctu

ring

Pro

f//E

th/S

oc/E

nv

1999/2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

Knowledge UB Importance

0

1

2

3

4

5

Ability t

o W

ork

in T

eam

s

Math

Modelin

g

Judg.

for

Eng.

Decis

ions

Choose/E

val.

Mate

rials

Pro

duct

Desig

n

and R

ealization

Com

munic

ation

Skills

CA

D M

odeling

and T

ools

Choose/E

val.

Mfg

.

Pro

cesses

1999/2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

Skill UB Importance

-25

0

25

50

75

100

Exp

. to

Pra

ctic

e

Pro

f//E

th/S

oc/E

nv

Man

ufac

turin

g

Des

ign

Sys

. D

ynam

ics

Mac

hine

s/M

echs

.

Mec

hani

cs

Num

. C

omps

.

Mat

eria

lsS

cien

ce

Flu

id M

echa

nics

Mat

hem

atic

s

Sci

ence

s

Hea

t T

rans

fer

The

rmod

ynam

ics

Knowledge Shortfall

Seniors 1999 vs Seniors 2007

-25

0

25

50

75

100

Co

mm

un

ica

tion

Ski

lls

Ch

oo

se/E

val.

Mfg

. Pro

cess

es

CA

D M

od

elin

ga

nd

To

ols

Jud

g. f

or

En

g.

De

cisi

on

s

Pro

du

ct D

esi

gn

an

d R

ea

liza

tion

Ab

ility

to W

ork

inT

ea

ms

Ch

oo

se/E

val.

Ma

teri

als

Ma

th M

od

elin

g

Skill Shortfall

Seniors 1999 vs Seniors 2007

-25

0

25

50

75

100

Com

mun

icat

ion

Ski

lls

Cho

ose/

Eva

l.M

fg.

Pro

cess

es

CA

D M

odel

ing

and

Too

ls

Judg

. fo

r E

ng.

Dec

isio

ns

Pro

duct

Des

ign

and

Rea

lizat

ion

Abi

lity

to W

ork

in T

eam

s

Cho

ose/

Eva

l.M

ater

ials

Mat

h M

odel

ing

Skill Shortfall

Alumni 94-98 vs Alumni 00-04

-25

0

25

50

75

100

Exp

. to

Pra

ctic

e

Pro

f//E

th/S

oc/E

nv

Man

ufac

turin

g

Des

ign

Sys

. D

ynam

ics

Mac

hine

s/M

echs

.

Mec

hani

cs

Num

. C

omps

.

Mat

eria

lsS

cien

ce

Flu

id M

echa

nics

Mat

hem

atic

s

Sci

ence

s

Hea

t T

rans

fer

The

rmod

ynam

ics

Knowledge Shortfall

Alumni 94-98 vs Alumni 00-04

Overall Survey Conclusions

• Career Importance surveys show consistency from year to year

• UB Importance surveys reflect the targeted program changes

• Short Fall results since revision show improved– Design, manufacturing, CAD– Practice, professionalism, judgement

• Short Fall results since revision show little effect on traditional technical and science topics

Senior Design Course

• One semester course• Students work in groups of two or three• Projects mostly from industry• Wide range of topics• Many projects are assigned to more than one

group to provide competition

Course Deliverables

• Initial project description including task assignments and schedule

• Weekly oral progress reports• Midterm oral presentation to tutorial section• Midterm written report• Final oral presentation to tutorial section • Presentation to the sponsor (with competing group)• Final written report

Course Structure• Lecture and tutorials• Lectures meet only occasionally • Tutorials meet weekly for about one hour• Four to six groups are in each tutorial• Student groups describe their weekly progress in

the tutorial sections• Students meet with sponsors periodically and

make Email contacts as necessary

Typical Projects

• Babcock and Wilcox (boiler design and manufacture)– Design of a “flue” to handle boiler exhaust

gases– Design of a support system for a boiler

“header” pipe– Mechanical load, high temperature and thermal

expansion are major concerns

Roller Stresses

Typical Projects

• Moog Inc. (design and manufacture of hydraulic actuators and controls)– Design of a wire retaining system for the end

cap of a hydraulic cylinder– Primary issue is stress in the cylinder groove

supporting the wire retainer– Light weight is a primary consideration

Geometry

Example FEM Results

Typical Projects

• Calspan Corp. (contract research and development company)– Redesign of a tire testing machine for use at

higher speeds– Concerns include steel belt during testing– Protection of components from water bearing

discharge– Natural frequencies of excitation– Specification of strain gage locations for force

sensing

Tire Tester

Force Sensing

Right Web – FEM Analysis

Full Balance – FEM Analysis

Typical Projects

• Nuttall Gear (design and manufacture of drives and gears for process applications)– Redesign of a gear drive system– Gear wear and noise are issues– Identified shaft deflection and natural

frequencies as major concerns– Use of existing parts highly desired

Gear Box Installation

Typical Projects

• Rich Products (major manufacturer of non-dairy “cream” products)– Design/selection of production facility for

packing millions of containers of “whip topping”

– Production speed, possible package redesign are major considerations

– Payback period of replacement system important

Whip Topping Product

Included in Solution

• Need TwoTwo machines• Output:

50-60 bags per minute50-60 bags per minute

• Machine cost: $400,000- $450,000

• Size:4.1m X 2.3m X 1.9m

• Lead time5 months

Conclusions…

• ABET 2000 has provided motivation to reconsider our program

• We tried to use it in updating our curriculum on a customer oriented basis

• Quantitative surveys effective in understanding student needs and overcoming faculty inertia

• Industrial design projects are important for providing experience and developing skills