A capstone mechanical engineering laboratory course is being implemented at the University of South Carolina that develops the student's abilities to analyze complex mechanical and thermal systems, to design experiments, and to develop their professional skills. The course is based upon an integrated sequence of laboratory experiments on a Legends-class racecar. This vehicle is chosen as the system of study because it provides opportunities for the students to apply the spectrum of their mechanical engineering knowledge. It's also exciting to the students. As the students progress through the series of experiments, they are increasingly involved in experimental design (selecting sensors, sensor locations and experimental operating conditions). The course culminates in a truly open-ended design of an experiment of their choosing. Journal of Engineering Education 111 higher-order thinking skills. (a) Level 1: conduct experiments; (b) Level 2: redesign experiments; (c) Level 3: design experiments. Figure 2. To develop design of experiment abilities, the students complete laboratory projects in levels that required progressively

No abstract

Water hammer is defined as a sudden increase in pipe pressure, which results in pressure waves that travel along the pipe at sonic velocities. In the wake of the pressure wave, dynamic stresses are created in the pipe wall, which contribute to pipe failures. A finite element analysis, computer program was used to determine the three dimensional dynamic stresses which result from pipe wall vibration at a distance from the end of a pipe, during a water hammer event. The analysis was used to model a moving shock wave in a pipe, using a step pressure wave. Both aluminum and steel were modeled for an 8 NPS pipe, using Abaqus®. For either material, the maximum stress was seen to be equal when damping was neglected. At the time the maximum stress occurred, the hoop stress was equivalent to twice the stress that would be expected if an equivalent static stress was applied to the inner wall of the pipe. At the same time, the radial stress was limited to the magnitude of the applied pressure, and the axial stress was equal to zero.

This paper describes the results of a novel approach in a senior mechanical engineering lab course, which combined team reporting, self-assessment of writing, conference grading, and consultative techniques that help learners improve both their communicative competence and their performance. We argue that the approach increases communications assignments and makes them more effective as teaching tools, without increasing the professor's workload. Moreover, the approach is similar to industry practices of reviewing communications face-to-face and evaluating them in the context of assigned project objectives, and therefore better prepares students for the demands of the workplace. In addition to the instructor's assessment, the reactions of the students were obtained by oral surveys. The results indicated that the students believed the approach to increase their understanding of assignments, their attention to and understanding of the instructor's comments, and their motivation. Finally, initial assessment of student writing indicated improvement resulting from the innovation. A new method of assessment and feedback Traditionally, grading of communications assignments in engineering courses involves written comments from the instructor(s) designed to give students feedback on their work. Thus, for written assignments the instructor writes comments in the margins and/or general summative comments at the end or beginning of the paper. Similarly, oral presentation assessments often consist of feedback sheets on which the instructor has written comments during and/or after the presentation. The ultimate aim of these procedures is of course to improve students' competence in professional communications. However, it often seems doubtful that this goal is achieved. First, written assessments are time-consuming for the instructor, which can cause faculty to be reluctant to give many communications assignments. Therefore, the practice of written assessment can result in less communicative practice for the students. Even more importantly, research has shown that students often do not profit from written comments. They do not know how to use the comments to improve their writing, have difficulty interpreting the comments, and in many cases do not even read them (Bardine 1999, Elbow 1997, Hodges 1997). The problem appears even more serious when we consider that in engineering industry workplaces collaborative writing is the norm, i.e. comments on papers and presentations are given with the expectation that the writers or presenters will consider the comments and modify their communications accordingly. Therefore, a more effective way of giving students feedback on their communications assignments

A new capstone mechanical engineering laboratory course was recently institutionalized at the University of South Carolina. The course is based upon an integrated sequence of laboratory experiments on a Legends-class racecar, chosen because it involves many fundamental mechanical engineering principles. It's also exciting to the students. As the students progress through the series of experiments, they are increasingly involved in experimental design. In this way, the course develops the student's abilities to analyze complex mechanical and thermal systems, to design experiments, and to practice life-long learning. The course development was supported by the National Science Foundation's CCLI and ILI programs and the University of South Carolina. Previous presentations described the test vehicle and instrumentation. This paper focuses on project evaluation and assessment results that are being used to improve the course's effectiveness.