An official website of the United States government
Structural analysis is the foundation of a structural engineer’s education, which generally includes topics ranging from basic statics to solving complex indeterminate structures. Most courses focus on theoretical approaches to solving and understanding problems with a large focus on determining internal forces, external reactions, and displacements. In many cases, courses also include concurrent discussion about deflected shapes and actual behavior compared to theoretical assumptions. Courses may also use pictures, videos, simulations, and small, table-top models to illustrate such behavior. However, students still struggle with understanding structural behavior and the effects of as-built versus theoretical connections. Such differences are difficult to convey simply using photos, videos, simulations, and small, table-top models. Students never have the opportunity to physically feel the differences and experience large-scale models that illustrate such behavior mainly due to cost, fabrication complexity, and material stiffness. The authors from University A and University B designed large-scale, lightweight models for in-class use that allow students to experience structural behavior and feel the differences between various types of as-built connections. This paper provides a detailed overview of the design, fabrication, and implementation of four large-scale experiential learning modules for an undergraduate structural analysis course using lightweight and flexible fiberglass reinforced polymer (FRP) structural shapes. The first module focuses on the behavior of beam-to-column connections compared to theoretical assumptions; the second module focuses on load paths and tributary areas related to a typical floor system; the third module focuses on the deflected shapes of determinate and indeterminate beams; and the fourth module focuses on the behavior of a portal frame subjected to both vertical and horizontal loads with various support configurations. The four modules were used throughout the structural analysis course at University A and University B to illustrate structural behavior concurrent to the presentation of various structural analysis concepts.
more »
« less
The Wooden Bike Frame Challenge: Learning Statics Through Hands-On Design
Statics is a core course taken by undergraduate mechanical engineers in their freshmen or sophomore years. The course involves characterizing structures that remain still (static) under load. Statics concepts traditionally build in complexity from isolated particles, then to rigid bodies, and finally to structures formed by multiple rigid bodies. Structural analysis, otherwise known as “frames and machines,” is thus one of the more complex topics covered in Statics because it integrates prior knowledge of particle and rigid body equilibrium with new concepts like two-force members and internal loads. Traditionally, students become proficient in structural analysis by solving textbook problems where implicitly or explicitly, these problems classify the structure as either a “frame” or a “machine.” This classification in problem wording hints at the solution method and typically requires students to calculate the loads at a particular connector or cross section at risk of failure, thus reducing opportunities for structural analysis before computation. In actual practice, structural analysis is less straightforward; engineers must thoughtfully examine the structure to determine the best method of analysis and likely failure location(s). Prior studies have introduced project-based learning (PBL) experiences for Statics courses that involve more realistic open-ended design, analysis, and validation. However, the prototyping component of these studies often falls short of actual practice by limiting students to scale model designs in craft grade materials, e.g., table-top sized bridges constructed from balsa wood. While economical and logistically simplistic, scale model designs do not reinforce industry-relevant design and fabrication skills, e.g., CAD/CAM and shop skills. Furthermore, scale models cannot be subjected to realistic loading conditions, which disconnects the analysis and validation portions of the project from actual engineering practice. In this study, we introduce a novel PBL exercise – the Wooden Bike Frame Challenge – for Statics courses that focuses on structural analysis and involves fabrication of a full-scale wooden bike frame using CAD/CAM techniques. The complete set of instructional materials, including problem statements, assignments, and rubrics, are included in this study for open-source use by other engineering educators. We evaluated the efficacy of this exercise in reinforcing students’ knowledge of statics concepts and previously acquired prototyping skills using a mixed-methods approach. Study subjects were sophomore year mechanical engineering students who were teamed (n=158 students in 37 teams). The effect of the PBL exercise on content knowledge was determined by comparing pre- and post-PBL solutions to structural analysis textbook problems, as well as the more open-ended structural analysis of the bike frame designs. Post-PBL, students individually completed a survey assessing their level of engagement with the analytical and design aspects of the PBL exercise and perceived value of the project. The Wooden Bike Frame Challenge demonstrates the value of embedding full-scale design experiences into core courses like Statics, not only for strengthening newly acquired knowledge like structural analysis, but also for reinforcing industry-standard design and fabrication skills from prior coursework.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2301341
- PAR ID:
- 10532641
- Publisher / Repository:
- ASEE Conferences
- Date Published:
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Location:
- Portland, Oregon
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
This paper presents the design and analysis of a pilot problem set deployed to engineering students to assess their retention of physics knowledge at the start of a statics course. The problem set was developed using the NSF-IUSE (grant #2315492) Learning Map project (LMap) and piloted in the spring and fall of 2024. The LMap process is rooted in the Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation (ADDIE) model [1] and Backward Design [2,3], extending these principles to course sequences to align learning outcomes, assessments, and instructional practices. The primary motivation for this problem set (Statics Knowledge Inventory, SKI) was to evaluate students' understanding and retention of physics concepts at the beginning of a statics course. The SKI includes a combination of multiple-choice questions (MCQ) and procedural problems, filling a gap in widely-used concept inventories for physics and statics, such as the Force Concept Inventory (FCI) and Statics Concept Inventory (SCI), which evaluate learning gains within a course, rather than knowledge retention across courses. Using the LMap analysis and instructor consultations, we identified overlapping concepts and topics between Physics and Statics courses, referred to here as “interdependent learning outcomes” (ILOs). The problem set includes 15 questions—eight MCQs and seven procedural problems. Unlike most concept inventories, procedural problems were added to provide insight into students’ problem-solving approach and conceptual understanding. These problems require students to perform calculations, demonstrate their work, and assess their conceptual understanding of key topics, and allow the instructors to assess essential prerequisite skills like drawing free-body diagrams (FBDs), computing forces and moments, and performing basic vector calculation and unit conversions. Problems were selected and adapted from physics and statics textbooks, supplemented by instructor-designed questions to ensure full coverage of the ILOs. We used the revised 2D Bloom’s Taxonomy [4] and a 3D representation of it [5] to classify each problem within a 6x4 matrix (six cognitive processes x four knowledge dimensions). This classification provided instructors and students with a clear understanding of the cognitive level required for each problem. Additionally, we measured students’ perceived confidence and difficulty in each problem using two questions on a 3-point Likert scale. The first iteration of the problem set was administered to 19 students in the spring 2024 statics course. After analyzing their performance, we identified areas for improvement and revised the problem set, removing repetitive MCQs and restructuring the procedural problems into scaffolded, multi-part questions with associated rubrics for evaluation. The revised version, consisting of five MCQs and six procedural problems, was deployed to 136 students in the fall 2024 statics course. A randomly selected subset of student answers from the second iteration was graded and analyzed to compare with the first. This analysis will inform future efforts to evaluate knowledge retention and transfer in key skills across sequential courses. In collaboration with research teams developing concept inventories for mechanics courses, we aim to integrate these procedural problems into future inventories.more » « less
-
This research is motivated by the need for students’ early exposure to work readiness skills that promote effectiveness in dealing with complex open-ended technical problems as may be encountered in senior capstone projects or professional practice. This paper presents preliminary work in the use of building Rube Goldberg machines as student projects to foster some of these skills. Design of Rube Goldberg machines may be employed in a number of settings as a vehicle for teaching basic engineering skills. These designs require students to creatively consider a variety of unconventional approaches to solve simple problems. The Rube Goldberg paradigm allows students to communicate and to advance their ideas in a low-pressure environment where brainstorming is highly valued and where prior technical expertise affords no specific advantage. As such, projects based on Rube Goldberg machines are an effective way for freshmen and sophomore students, who may lack extensive technical skills, to acquire greater proficiency in some of the non-technical skills. This research gives results from a pilot study in project management using the Rube Goldberg model. The goal of this study is to determine the perceived efficacy of a proposed teaching vehicle for project management concepts that could strengthen the early stages of an existing series of Project Based Learning (PBL) oriented undergraduate engineering courses at the host institution, which currently make use of more closed-ended and single-solution design projects. In the study, a cohort of 27 engineering and engineering technology students participated in a sequence of extracurricular sessions in which they undertook progressively challenging open-ended project assignments. Each project introduced new constraints that required the students to address additional aspects of project management. Results from an end-of-year survey show that the participants had strongly positive impressions of their experiences related to these exercises. A majority of students felt that they had enhanced skills that would be valuable in professional life (96%), improved their leadership skills (92%), and had gained appreciation for the value of project planning (100%) and technical documentation (96%). It is anticipated that lessons learned from the project sequence will provide the framework for cross-disciplinary freshman and sophomore assignments in host institution’s PBL curriculum in the future.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)Abstract Insufficient engineering analysis is a common weakness of student capstone design projects. Efforts made earlier in a curriculum to introduce analysis techniques should improve student confidence in applying these important skills toward design. To address student shortcomings in design, we implemented a new design project assignment for second-year undergraduate biomedical engineering students. The project involves the iterative design of a fracture fixation plate and is part of a broader effort to integrate relevant hands-on projects throughout our curriculum. Students are tasked with (1) using computer-aided design (CAD) software to make design changes to a fixation plate, (2) creating and executing finite element models to assess performance after each change, (3) iterating through three design changes, and (4) performing mechanical testing of the final device to verify model results. Quantitative and qualitative methods were used to assess student knowledge, confidence, and achievement in design. Students exhibited design knowledge gains and cognizance of prior coursework knowledge integration into their designs. Further, students self-reported confidence gains in approaching design, working with hardware and software, and communicating results. Finally, student self-assessments exceeded instructor assessment of student design reports, indicating that students have significant room for growth as they progress through the curriculum. Beyond the gains observed in design knowledge, confidence, and achievement, the fracture fixation project described here builds student experience with CAD, finite element analysis, 3D printing, mechanical testing, and design communication. These skills contribute to the growing toolbox that students ultimately bring to capstone design.more » « less
-
This work in progress research paper considers the question, what kind of problems do engineering students commonly solve during their education? Engineering problems have been generally classified as ill-structured/open-ended or well-structured/closed-ended. Various authors have identified the characteristics of ill-structured problems or presented typologies of problems. Simple definitions state that well-structured problems are simple, concrete, and have a single solution, while ill-structured problems are complex, abstract, and have multiple possible solutions (Jonassen, 1997, 2000). More detailed classifications have been provided by Shin, Jonassen, and McGee (2003), Voss (2006), and Johnstone (2001). It is commonly understood that classroom problems are well-structured while workplace problems are ill-structured, but we cannot find any empirical data to confirm or deny this proposition. Engineers commonly encounter ill-structured problems such as design problems in the field therefore problem-solving skills are invaluable and should be taught in engineering courses. This research specifically looks at the types of problems present in the two most commonly used statics textbooks (Hibbeler, 2016; Beer, et al., 2019). All end-of-chapter problems in these textbooks were classified using Jonassen’s (2000) well-known typology of problem types. Out of 3,387 problems between both books, 99% fell into the algorithmic category and the remaining fell into the logic category. These preliminary results provide an understanding of the types of problems engineering students most commonly encounter in their classes. Prior research has documented that textbook example problems exert a strong influence on students' problem-solving strategies (Lee et al., 2013). If instructors only assign textbook problems, students in statics courses do not see any ill-structured problems at that stage in their education. We argue that even in foundational courses such as statics, students should be exposed to ill-structured problems. By providing opportunities for students to solve more ill-structured problems, students can become more familiar with them and become better prepared for the workforce. Moving forward, textbooks from several other courses will be analyzed to determine the difference between a fundamental engineering course such as statics and upper-level courses. This research will allow us to determine how the problem types differ between entry level and advanced classes and reveal if engineering textbooks primarily contain well-structured problems. Keywords: problem solving, textbooks, ill-structured problemsmore » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Conference Paper:
- https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--48150
