A Unique Approach to Teaching Thermodynamics

CPT Blace C. Albert – Instructor, Dr. Ozer Arnas – Visiting Professor, Dr. Margaret Bailey – Assistant Professor, MAJ Shawn Klawunder – Instructor, COL John S. Klegka – Mechanical

Engineering Division Director, MAJ David Wolons – Assistant ProfessorDepartment of Civil and Mechanical Engineering

United States Military AcademyWest Point, NY 10996 USA

Abstract

The Department of Civil and Mechanical Engineering at the United States Military Academy (USMA) offers a course in thermodynamics that is well known among the Corps of Cadets due to its uniqueness and applicability. Cadets from every department in the academy enroll in the course and are taught by a faculty that is composed of both military and civilian professors. The classroom and laboratory experiences that have been designed over the past decade provide students with a broad introductory exposure to thermodynamics while focusing on very relevant applications. This paper presents an overview of the thermodynamic experience created at the USMA and offers several examples of its uniqueness.

Introduction

The United States Military Academy (USMA) located in West Point, New York includes thirteen different academic departments offering over sixty academic majors. While pursuing a four-year college degree, the students that attend the academy are also training to serve as officers in the United States Army and are therefore known as cadets. The complete student body is referred to as the Corps of Cadets and includes representation from every state in the nation as well as numerous foreign countries. The mission of the USMA (USMA Office of the Dean, 1998) is “to educate, train, and inspire the Corps of Cadets so that each graduate is a commissioned leader of character committed to the values of Duty, Honor, Country; professional growth throughout a career as an officer in the United States Army; and a lifetime of selfless service to the nation.”

West Point’s Department of Civil and Mechanical Engineering offers an ABET accredited degree in mechanical engineering (ME). Cadets enrolled in ME must successfully complete a course of study very similar to that required by their peers at civilian institutions. Each year, approximately 75 cadets select mechanical engineering as a major and they typically enroll in Thermodynamics in their first semester of their third year. However, regardless of academic major, all students supplement their general education or core requirements at the USMA with a five-course engineering sequence

capped with at least one design course. Therefore, thermodynamic instructors are challenged to teach this course to students majoring in a variety of areas such as language, history, political science, as well as mechanical engineering.

The laws of thermodynamics are the same regardless of whether they are taught to an engineering major or a history major. Therefore, thermodynamics is not offered as two separate courses, one for engineering majors and the other for humanities oriented majors. Instead all students take the same course and there is a mixture of majors in any given class. One crucial advantage in this method success is that all cadets must take the same core curriculum, including basic science courses (mathematics, physics, and chemistry). This foundation gives our students a common background from which to build regardless of academic major. The total annual enrollment in Thermodynamics typically reaches 500 or roughly half of all eligible cadets. Large course enrollment coupled with the academy’s restriction of a maximum of 18 cadets per section, results in the creation of thirteen to fifteen thermodynamic sections per semester.

The course structure includes a lecture and laboratory component. There are 35 lectures, each 55 minutes in length that follow a classical textbook. The topics covered include definitions, pure substances, ideal equation of state, conservation of mass and energy, and the second law. In order to enhance the student’s learning, several applications are studied in detail including steam power plants, air standard cycles, emissions, vapor compression refrigeration systems,

psychrometrics, and air conditioning. The lectures are further augmented by an ABET design project and four laboratories focused on steam turbines, SI/CI engine comparison, Cooperative Fuel Research (CFR) engines, and gas turbines. We complete our course with a visit to the academy power plant. Each of these areas will be discussed in more detail in later sections of this paper. The course also includes two 30-minute quizzes and two 55-minute tests. The final cumulative examination completes the cadet’s course requirements.

Thermodynamics at the USMA is designated as either EM301 or EM301A. Most cadets pursuing an ABET accredited engineering degree, such as mechanical or civil engineering, enroll in the EM301A version of the course. These engineering cadets attend the same lectures and laboratories as the students enrolled in EM301; however, the engineers also complete a group design project, as defined by ABET. The course credit for EM301 is three, with an additional half credit for those enrolling in EM301A.

Thermodynamics Faculty

The faculty team that teaches EM301 is typical in composition to other teaching teams found in large enrollment courses at USMA. The team reflects the diversity of the USMA faculty. It is a blend of senior military faculty, civilian faculty, and junior military faculty. Each of these groups brings special talents to the teaching team. At the USMA, the senior military faculty is responsible for filling most of the administrative and leadership positions. They typically have six to fifteen years of service on the faculty and help provide continuity and stability to the academy. In addition, these faculty members are involved in the development and improvement of academic programs (such as the mechanical engineering program) as well as individual courses. Each has a PhD in a relevant discipline. They make up about 15% of the overall faculty. Civilian faculty members increase the depth of expertise on the teaching team, help provide continuity, and provide a different perspective from that of a predominantly military faculty. These faculty members serve similar roles as their colleagues at civilian colleges and universities. Each civilian faculty member also has a Ph.D. in a relevant discipline. Civilian faculty comprise between 20-25% of the overall faculty. The largest part of the teaching team is made up of junior military faculty. These

educators are active duty military officers, typically in their seventh to twelfth year of service in the United States Army. The officers are carefully selected from among the best in the service. Each is a volunteer who comes to the USMA after the completion of a Master's program in a relevant discipline at a leading civilian university. These officers are the heart of the faculty at West Point both from the standpoint of their numbers (about 60-65% of the faculty) as well as the number of cadets that each of them teaches. In addition, they serve as role models for the cadets to emulate. On a daily basis cadets interact with successful officers and see the level of dedication and professionalism that each aspires to achieve. The mix of skills, education, and experience make the faculty teaching team well equipped to present the latest material in an effective and challenging fashion to the students.

In order to prepare incoming faculty for their unique teaching experience at the USMA, each department runs a new instructor training program during the summer prior to the first semester of instruction. The Department of Civil and Mechanical Engineering calls this program the Instructor Summer Workshop (ISW). ISW lasts six weeks and is structured not only to train the instructors in the art of active learning, but also to teach them the department standards and orient them to the West Point community. The goal of ISW is to train the instructors so that they have a level of competence and confidence such that the cadets recognize them as experienced instructors.

ISW begins with an introduction and orientation from the department head. The first full week commences with a Teaching Techniques Workshop that includes several references to the engineering education research conducted by Wankat and Oreovicz (1993) as well as Lowman (1995). Table 1 summarizes the various topics covered during this initial, three-day workshop. Senior faculty, who have taught at the USMA for several years, conduct all seminars. They model all of the topics discussed in their own presentations and they also teach four different classes of varying subjects in order to demonstrate various teaching techniques.

The new instructors then enter several weeks in which they are required to teach lessons from the course they will teach in the fall. They begin by teaching a short, 30 minute long class to give them a taste of the difficulty that can be encountered in living up to the department’s expectations of a class. New instructors then present six 55-minute long classes over the next three weeks. The classes are spread out in order to give the new instructors ample time to prepare and

make improvements. In every class, several senior faculty attend in order to ask typical questions that could be expected from the cadets. They also provide the new instructor with immediate oral and written feedback at the conclusion of the class. In addition to this, every class is videotaped so that the instructors can view the class for themselves, making notes of what they did well and what was awkward or distracting.

Table 1 - ISW Teaching Techniques Workshop

Seminar Subject1 Learning to Teach in the Civil and

Mechanical Engineering Department2 Principles of Effective Teaching and

Learning3 Teaching Assessment4 An Introduction to Learning Styles5 Organizing a Class6 Planning the Class7 Communication and Presentation

Skills8 Questioning Techniques9 Classroom Assessment Techniques10 Systematic Design of Instruction11 Teaching with Technology

During the last week of classes, the new instructors also receive peer evaluations that not only provide additional feedback, but also train the new instructors on how to provide useful assessment. The assessment process used during ISW does not end once the fall semester begins. Throughout the year a new instructor can expect to have three to five visits from senior faculty and peers. These visitors will attend a class in which they fill out a Teaching Assessment Worksheet (included as Appendix 1). The purpose of the visit is to assess the instructor on technical expertise, lesson organization, conduct of the class, and the classroom environment. These assessments are maintained in an instructor’s Teacher Portfolio. This notebook houses the assessments along with other documents that assist the instructors in conducting the on-going process of self-assessment. For a more detailed description of the ISW experience, the interested reader should refer to Hanus and Evans (2001).

Course Background

The goal of EM301 is to provide cadets with a practical and relevant engineering science

background in thermodynamics. Additionally, engineering majors enrolled in EM301A complete an engineering design project and therefore gain design experience in thermodynamics. The course also provides the groundwork for subsequent studies in engineering sciences and advanced energy topics. In addition, numerous course requirements enhance both oral and written communication skills. The course is designed to provide a solid foundation in classical thermodynamics through the study of three broad topic areas including preliminary topics, methods and tools of analysis, and relevant applications. Refer to Table 2 for a complete summary of topic coverage.

Table 2 – Summary of Topics Explored in EM301

Subject LessonsIntroduction to thermodynamic concepts and nomenclature

2

Steam tables 2Ideal gas equation of state and energy transfer concepts

2

1st Law of Thermodynamics 62nd Law of Thermodynamics 3Thermodynamic devices and adiabatic efficiencies

1

Steam vapor power cycles 5Internal combustion engines 5Automotive emissions 1Gas turbine engines 4Vapor-compression refrigeration cycles 2Total air conditioning applications (psychrometrics)

2

Review classes 3Exams 2

EM301 begins with a series of lessons on preliminary topics to allow the student to understand and internalize the language of thermodynamics. These first lessons include discussions on basic definitions, properties of substances, and the ideal gas law. Here, the vapor dome is presented and the cadets learn how it is used to fix states and properties. The methods and tools of analysis section of the course begins with a lesson on energy transfers in the form of heat and work. Instructors introduce the 1st and 2nd

Laws of Thermodynamics. Students apply the laws to closed and open systems. Prior to the introduction of detailed applications, the students learn the methods involved in determining adiabatic efficiencies for various mechanical devices.

Once this basic foundation has been laid, students apply their newly acquired knowledge to studying various cycles as described in Table 2. They begin by learning how to analyze steam vapor power cycles using the Mollier diagram and applicable steam tables. The steam vapor power cycle configurations analyzed range in complexity from the ideal Rankine cycle to actual reheat and regenerative cycles. Cadets then complete a block of instruction on internal combustion engines to include actual and ideal spark-ignition and compression-ignition cycles. An automotive emissions lesson is included to present relevant current automotive innovations in the area of pollution control. Gas turbine engine cycles are examined next. The students first study the ideal Brayton cycle and then both ideal and actual regenerative gas turbine engines. In addition, ideal and actual jet propulsion cycles are included. The course concludes with lessons on the vapor-compression refrigeration cycle (ideal and actual) and total air conditioning applications using the psychrometric chart.

Since this course is only one semester long, there are certain topics that are not included due to time limitations. Some of the more notable omissions include exergy, transient systems, thermodynamic property relations, chemical reactions, chemical and phase equilibrium, and thermodynamics of high-speed gas flow.

The course is supported by an internal, thermodynamics website. This website includes a course syllabus, the course standards and requirements, a list of home study problems, and links to the Standards for Written Technical Reports (1991) and other helpful information. As the semester progresses, the scanned solutions for all of the in-class sample problems and practice problems are linked to the website. Each instructor also maintains a separate section of the website to post solutions for individual homework and the grades of their students for each graded requirement. The website is an excellent tool for providing the cadets immediate feedback.

The cadet’s course grade is assigned through the use of two 55-minute exams, two 30-minute quizzes, four labs, an instructor grade, a three and a half hour final examination, and the design project for those cadets enrolled in the EM301A version of the course. Instructor grades are generally based on the cadet’s performance on homework and short, in-class quizzes. Table 3 lists the graded events included in EM301 with associated event weights.

Table 3 – EM301 Graded Event Summary

Graded Event Quantity Points55 minute exam 2 200 ea.30 minute quiz 2 100 ea.Labs 4 50 ea.Instructor grade 1 200Design project (ABET only)

1 225

Term-end exam 1 475TOTAL 1700

Course Administration

The greatest challenge in a course of this size is maintaining equity between sections. In general, the course is taught by anywhere from five to seven instructors per semester. An important objective is to ensure that each cadet is taught the same course material while allowing instructors to use their own teaching style. A course director is assigned to oversee all administrative aspects of the course. Besides teaching, equity between sections is the course director's main focus.

The process begins each year with a course proposal, which is presented at the end of the spring semester (Floersheim and Bailey, 2001). During the course proposal process, the course director conducts a review of the entire course using formal feedback from cadets and feedback from the instructors who have taught the course during the year. The course is structured around a set of six major course objectives that will be discussed in more detail within this section. Individual lesson objectives are reviewed and modified to ensure that course objectives are being met. Cadet feedback is essential for developing these objectives. At the end of each semester, cadets are asked to rate their ability to accomplish each of the course objectives. This feedback is used in the course proposal process to adjust the amount of time allotted to cover each objective. The course proposal is also used to ensure that the thermodynamics course is meeting the overall mechanical engineering division objectives.

During the semester, the course director conducts weekly lesson conferences with all instructors to coordinate instruction for the following week. Weekly lesson conferences also serve as an effective means of enhancing student learning through open discussions by the diverse thermodynamic teaching faculty. The primary tool used to facilitate discussion during the lesson conference is board notes. These also serve as an excellent means for lesson preparation. Each classroom is equipped with blackboards that are,

by design, divided into three-foot wide sections that surround the classroom. Board notes are a written plan of what the instructor plans to write on each blackboard section during the class. These notes serve as an example for each instructor in preparing his or her own board notes. The notes are commonly modified to meet an individual instructor's teaching style. Each week, the course director reviews his board notes for the following week. This is an open discussion where ideas are exchanged between instructors for teaching each lesson objective. At the same lesson conference, the course director furnishes each instructor with a copy of his board notes that will be discussed at the next lesson conference. The weekly meeting also serves as a coordination meeting for scheduling, training aid and laboratory demonstrations, and other administrative requirements.

The ability to maintain equity between sections is further reinforced by all cadets being evaluated equally. All instructors give the same writs, mid-term exams, final exams, and graded laboratory reports. An instructor has the flexibility to adjust the order that he teaches specific lesson objectives but he must ensure that all applicable lesson objectives are covered prior to the exam. The use of common examinations allows each faculty member to assess how his or her students are progressing through the material and to gain feedback from fellow instructors covering the same material. In effect, there is a near real time assessment process in place to monitor how well students are doing and to allow for needed course adjustment to occur.

Grading is also highly uniform between sections. The course director prepares solutions and cut scales for each question on an exam. The cut scales assign specific point deductions for each component of a solution. Each individual instructor using the same cut scale grades quizzes. For the mid-term and final exams, one instructor is assigned to grade a specific page or problem on the exam for all students taking the course.

Each instructor is given an opportunity to influence the focus of a particular exam question. Typically, exam questions are written by several instructors and submitted to the course director to assemble into the final product. Several instructors then take the exam for time to ensure that it is of appropriate length and difficulty. We use a criterion based grading system so it is important that the exam is designed to challenge the students but it also must be possible for the best students to achieve an A.

Classroom Experience

The methodology that we use to teach thermodynamics at the USMA is similar to that of many other institutions. Prior to coming to class, the cadets read a section of their textbook pertaining to the lesson objectives that the instructors cover that day. The cadets then attend the lesson that typically includes at least one sample problem. Whereas most academic institutions refer to this as a lecture, we carefully refer to this as a class to avoid the image of a one-way information exchange that this word conjures up. Our classes are heavily laden with discussions between cadets and the instructor. Students may be given homework to complete prior to the next lesson and practice problems associated with every lesson are always available on the web.

Instructors at the USMA are able to bring thermodynamics alive through the use of many unique training aids. These training aids cover a broad range of complexities. During the early lessons, we use several small demonstrations to make the material more comprehendible to the cadets. During lesson two, “The Language of Thermodynamics”, we use a scale to demonstrate what quasi-equilibrium means, a pressure box to demonstrate the difference between absolute, gage, and vacuum pressures, and we also open up a pressure gage to examine how a Bourdon tube works. In lesson three, “Properties of Pure Substances and the Vapor Dome for Water”, we utilize a vacuum chamber to illustrate the temperature and pressure dependence of water. This leads to a discussion of cooking at high altitudes and using a pressure cooker. In lesson ten, “First law for a Cycle and Introductory Concepts of the Second Law”, we draw the heat pump/refrigeration/air conditioning cycle on the board and move magnetized pictures around the thermal reservoirs to illustrate that the only difference between these cycles is what the thermal reservoirs represent. These are examples of numerous demonstrations that instructors use throughout the course.

We also use some very unique training aids during the latter half of the semester. We have a cutaway of a Jeep in-line 6-cylinder engine that we use during the reciprocating engines block as shown in Figure 1. We also have several smaller models of spark-ignition, compression-ignition, and two-stroke engines. During the gas turbine section of the course we utilize a T-53 turbo-shaft engine cutaway and T-700 turbo-shaft engine cutaway from a UH-1 Huey and UH-60 Blackhawk helicopter, respectively. The T-700 cutaway is shown in Figure 2. These turbo-shaft

engines have been equipped to run electrically, at a very low rpm, so that the cadets can see how the compressor and turbine stages work. During the lessons covering the vapor-compression refrigeration cycle, we utilize a Brodhead-Garrett trainer. Other notable training aids include an AGT-1500 turbo-shaft engine from the M-1 Abrams main battle tank shown in Figure 3, a cutaway of a turbojet engine, and various cutaways of air conditioners and refrigerators.

Figure 1 – Cutaway of a Jeep In-line Six Cylinder Engine

We also use several different learning aids throughout the course. The first is what we call our steam card and it is included in Appendix II. The steam card presents a step-by-step process for the student to determine what region, in relation to the vapor dome, they are working in and then how to fix the state. We also provide the students with two flowcharts, one for the 1st Law and one for the 2nd Law of thermodynamics, included as. The latest versions of the 1st and 2nd

Law flow charts are included as Appendices III and IV, respectively. The flowcharts first ask whether the system is closed or open and lists 1st

or 2nd Law relations for each. It then asks what the medium is. If the medium is steam, the flowchart refers the student to procedures found on the steam card. If the medium is an ideal gas, the 1 st or 2nd

Law equations for either variable or constant specific heats are listed.

Figure 2 – T-700 Gas Turbine Engine from a UH-60 Blackhawk Helicopter

Figure 3 – AGT-1500 Turbo-Shaft Engine from the M-1 Abrams Main Battle Tank

Laboratory Experience

The objective of laboratories in EM301 is twofold. First the students are introduced to design of experiments. They are asked how they could instrument some device to obtain meaningful data. Second, students gain insight into practical applications of theory discussed in the classroom.

This lab procedure is initiated by introducing cadets to instrumentation and experimentation. This is followed by four laboratory exercises that augment lessons taught in the classroom. In each of these laboratories, cadets complete a pre-lab prior to the class and then take data and complete a lab report during a two-hour period. The students conduct the laboratory exercises in unique, dedicated laboratory facilities located within a classroom building at West Point. In the past, due to building renovations, some of the laboratory facilities have been unavailable for student use and therefore the students have conducted virtual laboratory exercises with the assistance of videotapes and pre-recorded data sets.

Instrumentation and experimentation is introduced by a reading assignment (Doebelin, 1995) followed by classroom discussion. After this instruction, students understand the purpose and operation of many instruments such as dynamometers, thermometers, thermocouples, tachometers, flow meters, and pressure gages. The instruction shows the students how to read a device to determine power output, efficiency, and many other parameters. Additionally, the handout introduces the cadets to uncertainty analysis.

Each laboratory is broken into three distinct parts including the pre-lab, lab, and final written report. The pre-lab is essentially a homework assignment that is given to the students a lesson prior to the lab period. This assignment is worth 30% of the final lab score and is turned in at the beginning of the lab period. The pre-lab includes a reading that introduces the lab equipment. This reading is followed by essay questions in which the students are required to determine different methods to instrument the equipment for analysis. It also includes a comprehensive problem concerning the specific power cycle covered in the lab.

Each laboratory exercise is initiated by an introduction to the equipment. This is an interactive orientation in which the cadets are asked to identify different components of the engine, gauges, and how these gauges will be used in the cycle analysis. Finally, the students are broken into three or four person teams and collect data from the lab equipment. After data collection, the students analyze the data in the lab report and answer a series of questions that require an understanding of conservation of mass, energy, and all aspects of the power cycle being studied.

The four laboratories completed in EM301 include a steam turbine, spark ignition/ compression ignition comparison, cooperative fuels research engine (spark timing and engine knock), and gas turbine labs. Each will be

discussed in detail within the following paragraphs.

The steam turbine laboratory facility is located on-site and includes a Carling and a Westinghouse steam turbine as well as associated superheaters, condensers, and generators. The Westinghouse steam turbine is shown in Figure 4. Each set-up is slightly different in configuration and this lab experience allows the cadets to analyze both turbines through data collection and analysis. A first law analysis is used to determine the power output and heat transfer rate from a Westinghouse turbine. A Carling turbine is studied to determine adiabatic efficiency and entropy generation. Finally, an uncertainty analysis is performed on the results.

Figure 4 – Westinghouse Steam Turbine

During the Otto and Diesel cycle portion of the course, two different laboratories are conducted. The first of these is the spark ignition/ compression ignition (SI/CI) comparison lab. Students obtain torque and fuel flow rate readings from a CI and SI engine with identical displacements over a range of engine speeds. This data is used to generate graphs that compare each engine’s relative power output and efficiency. The spark ignition engine emissions are also analyzed. This is accomplished by recording the level of carbon monoxide and hydrocarbon emissions present in the engine’s exhaust gases for different air-fuel ratios. Emission graphs are produced to determine optimal operating conditions. Cadets are also asked to explore other methods by which emissions may be reduced.

The cooperative fuel research lab permits students to investigate how spark timing angle, compression ratio and fuel octane level affect engine performance. This on-site laboratory facility includes four, single cylinder spark ignition engine set-ups as shown in Figure 5. Three fuels are used during the experimentation with varying levels of octane (86, 89, and 94).

The engines are designed to allow easy manipulation of the compression ratios. Students adjust the ratio from 6 to 8.5 during the laboratory exercise. Additionally, the students advance the spark-timing angles from 50 to 300 before top dead center. During the experiment, cadets measure engine horsepower and engine knock under the various operating conditions. The cadets use this data to produce a plot that depicts the effect on engine performance.

Figure 5 – Single Cylinder Spark Ignition Engines within the Comparative Fuel Research

Laboratory

The gas turbine lab is designed to afford students the opportunity to study the performance of a Blackhawk helicopter’s auxiliary power unit (APU). An APU is shown in Figure 6. A remote laboratory facility housing the two operational APU’s is located within walking distance from the ME department. Students obtain data from an actual APU and conduct a first law analysis of the compressor, combustor, and turbine. This information allows them to determine individual component and overall engine efficiencies. Finally cadets are asked how they could better instrument the laboratory to obtain more reliable data. This again reinforces the student’s ability to design and execute an experiment in practice.

Figure 6 – Blackhawk Helicopter’s Auxiliary Power Unit

Steam Power Plant Tour

Each semester, during the steam power cycle block of instruction, the students are taken on a tour of the West Point steam power plant. This is a cogeneration plant designed to provide a limited amount of electrical power to the main campus area while providing process heat for the cadet dining facilities, showers, and building heat. The plant also includes an absorption refrigeration system for air conditioning of one of the main academic buildings. This tour is a tremendous opportunity to expose the students to the sheer size of the steam power cycle components that they are learning about. Each instructor leads his own students through the plant giving him an opportunity to reinforce key concepts in the steam power cycle.

ABET Design Project

As previously mentioned, the USMA also offers an ABET accredited program for engineering majors. ABET requirements are satisfied in EM301A by assigning an additional engineering design project to the engineering majors. Because there is a steam power plant at West Point, it is used as the foundation for the design project. The basic scenario is that the power plant has been destroyed due to a fire and West Point is currently buying electricity from the local utility company. The cadets, working in design teams of three or four individuals, are tasked to design a new power plant. They must complete a design that will provide 2650 kW of power for cadet housing and 28,300 kW of process heat for showers, cooking, and building heat. The process heat requirement drives the design teams toward steam power plants that may or may not include reheat or regeneration. However some teams investigate the possibility of using a gas turbine plant design to satisfy the electricity requirement with the exhaust gases used in a regenerative steam power cycle.

The design process is broken into three sections over the course of the semester. Design teams orally conduct in-progress reviews (IPR’s) for their instructors twice throughout the semester. An IPR is a formal, oral briefing where the project’s progress is discussed in detail. During the first IPR, cadets bring in schematics, with all of the state points labeled, for two possible design

options. The schematics include temperature - entropy diagrams for all of the devices included in the design. The instructors evaluate the cadets’ designs and if necessary assist the teams with choosing one of the designs to carry forward in their analysis.

During the second IPR the teams brief their instructor on the improvements and corrections they have made since the first IPR. They also discuss several cost related topics, the thermal efficiency and the utilization factor for their design. The project concludes with a final written submission, written in accordance with the department’s Standards for Written Technical Reports (1991), and an oral presentation. Both of these are critical in developing the cadet’s communication abilities. The ABET design project was designed so that each student spends approximately twenty hours to complete the project.

Summary

The Department of Civil and Mechanical Engineering at the United States Military Academy (USMA) at West Point, New York offers a unique course in thermodynamics. This uniqueness can be attributed to a variety of factors including academy setting, faculty and student composition, new faculty training, laboratory facilities and classroom experiences. This paper presents an overview of the thermodynamics experience created at the USMA and offers several examples of its uniqueness as well as photographs depicting the thermodynamics laboratory facilities and training aids.

References

Doebelin, E.O., 1995, Engineering Experimentation: Planning, Execution, Reporting, McGraw-Hill, Inc.

Lowman, J., 1995, Mastering the Techniques of Teaching, Jossey-Bass Inc., San Francisco, California.

Floersheim, R., Bailey, M., 2001, “Course assessment: a tool for integrated curriculum management”, Proceedings of the 2001 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition, American Society for Engineering Education, Albuquerque, NM, June 24-27.

Hanus, J.P., Evans, M.D., 2001, “In pursuit of teaching excellence in the classroom --

Instructor Summer Workshop at West Point”, Proceedings of the 2001 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition, American Society for Engineering Education, Albuquerque, NM, June 24-27..USMA Department of Civil and Mechanical Engineering, 1991, Standards for Technical Reports, United States Military Academy. West Point.

USMA Office of the Dean, 1998, Educating Army Leaders for the 21st Century, United States Military Academy. West Point.

Wankat, P.C., Oreovicz, P.S., 1993, Teaching Engineering, McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York.

Appendix I - ISW Teaching Assessment Worksheet

TEACHING ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

Instructor: _______________________________ Assessed By: __________________________

Lesson Topic: ______________________________________________________ Date: _______

STRENGTHS:1234AREAS FOR IMPROVEMENT:1234

Nee

ds W

ork

Goo

d

Exc

elle

nt Remarks

TECHNICAL EXPERTISECommand of the Subject MatterLESSON ORGANIZATIONLesson ObjectivesOrganization of Boards & Classroom ActivitiesCONDUCT OF THE CLASSEnthusiasm, Energy, and ConfidenceOrientation to the Subject MatterClarity of Presentation (boards, viewgraphs, etc.)Clarity & Precision of ExplanationsVoice (volume, speed, variation)Questioning & Answering QuestionsContact with StudentsVisual Aids and DemonstrationsTime ManagementAppropriate Use of TextbookTHE CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENTClassroom AppearanceOVERALL ASSESSMENT: Are the students who attended this class adequately prepared to accomplish the Lesson Objectives? Yes No Not sure

Appendix I - Steam Card

Appendix II - Steam Card (continued)

Appendix III – First Law Flowchart

Appendix IV – Second Law Flowchart