Civil Engineering Education in a Visualization Environment: Experiences with VizClass

Journal of Engineering Education, Jul 2006 by Grimes, Douglas, Warschauer, Mark, Hutchinson, Tara, Kuester, Falko

Unreliability clearly detracted from enjoyment of the SketchFEA, at least for undergraduates, who averaged 2.4 on enjoyment of the program, compared with 3.5 for graduates. In spite of the growing pains for the new software, the instructor said all but four students were able to solve homework problems with it, and several students spoke highly of the intuitive visual interface and its great potential for saving time when fully functional and debugged.

The difference between graduate and undergraduate students' perceived value of the technologies corresponds to an apparent difference in their levels of engagement with the new technologies and the class in general. Graduate students reported spending more time on homeworks (not statistically significant), more time using SketchFEA (f

Term projects by two graduate students in the FEM class of Spring 2005 illustrate different ways of integrating OpenSees with visualization software. In the first project, the student built a 2D model of a shear wall building out of wooden coffee stirs and measured its deflection when subjected to a horizontal load. He then sketched the model with SketchFEA (Figure 2a), applied the same load to the computer model (Figure 2b), and compared the outcome with his physical mock-up. He also used SketchFEA and OpenSees to analyze three bracing options: shear wooden frame bracing, plywood shear sheathing, and shape memory alloy wires.

The second project was a visualization that would not have been feasible without a numerical solver to handle the thousands of degrees of freedom and associated large matrices sizes. The student used OpenSees as his numerical solver to model a geodesic dome, then analyzed the deformation under inward (Figure 3a) and outward (Figure 3b) internal pressure. He experimented with different mesh discretization settings (varying coarseness) and modified an open source graphics package to pre-process the mesh details for use in OpenSees.

IV. IMPACT ON TEACHING AND LEARNING

The educational impact may be summarized in terms of the teaching process, the learning process, and the learning outcomes.

1) Teaching process: Each of the three major visualization tools affected course structure in different ways. The digital whiteboards encouraged reorganization of presentations very much as an LCD projector would, i.e., around PowerPoint slides, animations, and other digital content. OpenSees, both by itself and in conjunction with SketchFEA, empowered students to solve more sophisticated problems than they could address with manual computations.

2) Learning process: There is widespread recognition that cooperative learning enhances critical thinking, reflective thinking, social skills, and motivation [reviewed in 16]. The digital whiteboards invited impromptu after-class discussions in small groups who gathered in front of the boards. Social protocols for sharing access to the large touchscreens emerged spontaneously, and were negotiated with body language more than words. Participation and visibility were more equal than with a laptop or desktop computer. In some cases, three students collectively drew, each with a different colored stylus.