See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/281430106

Assessment of Complex Engineering Problem in Thermal Engineering Course

Conference Paper · October 2014

CITATIONS READS

0 3,057

6 authors, including:

Rosnadiah Bahsan Zeno Michael

Universiti Teknologi MARA Universiti Teknologi MARA
8 PUBLICATIONS   10 CITATIONS    11 PUBLICATIONS   75 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Nazri Mohamad Wan Ahmad Najmi Wan Mohamed

Universiti Teknologi MARA Universiti Teknologi MARA
5 PUBLICATIONS   43 CITATIONS    70 PUBLICATIONS   264 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Future fuel additives for CI and SI Engines View project

Nanofluid coolants for PEM fuel cells View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Wan Ahmad Najmi Wan Mohamed on 02 September 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 6th IEEE International Conference on Engineering Education (ICEED) 2014
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Assessment of Complex Engineering Problem in Thermal Engineering

Course
Aman Mohd Ihsan Mamat, Wan Ahmad Najmi Wan Mohamed, Rosnadiah Bahsan, Zeno Micheal, Nazri
Mohamad, Mohd Hanif Mat@Muhammad

Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Universiti Teknologi MARA,

40450 Shah Alam, Selangor, Malaysia
*
Email: amanihsan@salam.uitm.edu.my
Phone: +6035543 6268; Fax: +6035543 5160

ABSTRACT
Complex Engineering Problem (CEP) is required in the section 4.0 Program Outcomes of the 2012 Engineering
Accreditation Council Manual. The CEP covers 5 out of 12 listed Program Outcomes in that manual. Therefore,
all of the engineering programs must implement the CEP in their courses. The five criteria of the CEP challenge
both the lecturers and students in developing and solving a practical engineering problem that comprehensively
applies the methods outlined throughout the syllabus. Before 2013, the assignment to students in MEC551
(Thermal Engineering) are based on individual topics and Course Outcomes (CO). As one of the core courses in
the Bachelor of Mechanical Engineering (Hons.) program, the assignment weightage and scope were expanded
as a platform to assess the students understanding on the relation and interactions of the individual topics within
the syllabus in a practical environment. The course consists of heat transfer fundamentals and applied
thermodynamic systems with 5 CO at intermediate Cognitive levels. The development of the CPE to meet the
defined criteria was based on the design analysis concept of an air-conditioning system. The problem solving
allows the students to apply 6 out of 7 topics within the syllabus and great emphasis was given on safety and
environmental preservation issues. Solutions of the various sub-system analyses were assigned with individual
CO and mapped to measure the PO contributions. Overall, the students showed a good ability to formulate
solution structures as it is shown by Key Performance Index (KPI) achievements of CO4 and CO3 at 88% and
81% of the students achieved at least 50% of the marks, respectively. The awareness on safety and
environmental issues are also good as it is shown by 87% CO5 KPI achievement. However, the ability to explain
and interpret the problem properly needs to be further improved as it is shown by the lowest percentage of the
KPI for the CO1 that directly relates to C2 cognitive level (explanation) achievement.

Keywords: Complex Engineering Problem, Course Outcome, Program Outcome, Assessment

Introduction participating countries will be recognized as long as

The Engineering Accredication Council (EAC)
is the responsible body to accredit Bachelor of
Engineering programs that are offered by
Institutions of Higher Learnings (IHLs). The
accredited engineering programs allows the
graduates to register with the Board of Engineers
Malaysia (BEM) as it is mentioned by the
Registration of Engineers Act 1965 (Revised 2002).
BEM has a duty to ensure that the quality of
engineering education/program of its registered
engineers attains the minimum standard comparable
to global practice, hence the necessity to accredit
engineering programmes conducted in IHLs (EAC
Manual, 2012).
In 2005, the EAC has introduced the Outcome
Based Education (OBE) which is an approach in
education where the developed curriculum is driven
by the outcomes of what the students should display
by the end of the program. The implementation of
OBE is according to the Washington Accord
agreement which was signed in 2003. According to
the accord, all Engineering Program offered in the
they conduct all the required elements. Among the
element is the OBE implementation that requires a
Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) not just in
the teaching and learning but also involves the
curriculum design.
The first EAC manual that contains the
Washington Accord elements was introduced in
2007. The manual has outlined 9 Program
Outcomes (POs). The Program Outcomes are the
statements that describe what students are expected
to attain by the end of the program. In 2012, EAC
of Malaysia has improved the engineering
accreditation elements. Among the improved
elements are the amendments of the POs content.
Now, there are 12 POs as they are outlined by the
EAC. Table 1 shows all the implemented POs and
is currently used by the Faculty of Mechanical
Engineering, Universiti Teknologi MARA for 2 of
their offered bachelor of engineering programs;
Bachelor of Engineering (Hons.) Mechanical and
Bachelor of Engineering (Hons) Mechanical
(Manufacturing). There is a new focus area that is
 6th IEEE International Conference on Engineering Education (ICEED) 2014
listed in the guideline which is Complex
Engineering Problem (CEP).
Table 1 EAC Guideline for Program Outcomes
Engineering Knowledge- Apply knowledge of
mathematics, science, engineering fundamentals and an
PO 1
engineering specialisation to the solution of complex
engineering problems
Problem Analysis - Identify, formulate, research literature
and analyse complex engineering problems reaching
PO2
substantiated conclusions using first principles of
mathematics, natural sciences and engineering sciences.
Design/Development of Solutions - Design solutions for
complex engineering problems and design systems,
PO3 components or processes that meet specified needs with
appropriate consideration for public health and safety,
cultural, societal, and environmental considerations.
Investigation - Conduct investigation into complex
problems using research based knowledge and research
PO4 methods including design of experiments, analysis and
interpretation of data, and synthesis of information to
provide valid conclusions
Modern Tool Usage - Create, select and apply appropriate
techniques, resources, and modern engineering and IT
PO5 tools, including prediction and modelling, to complex
engineering activities, with an understanding of the
limitations.
The Engineer and Society - Apply reasoning informed by
contextual knowledge to assess societal, health, safety,
PO6
legal and cultural issues and the consequent responsibilities
relevant to professional engineering practice.
Environment and Sustainability - Understand the impact
of professional engineering solutions in societal and
PO7
environmental contexts and demonstrate knowledge of and
need for sustainable development.
Ethics - Apply ethical principles and commit to
PO8 professional ethics and responsibilities and norms of
engineering practice.
Communication - Communicate effectively on complex
engineering activities with the engineering community and
with society at large, such as being able to comprehend and
PO9
write effective reports and design documentation, make
effective presentations, and give and receive clear
instructions.
Individual and Team Work - Function effectively as an
PO10 individual, and as a member or leader in diverse teams and
in multi-disciplinary settings.
Life Long Learning - Recognise the need for, and have the
preparation and ability to engage in independent and life-
PO11
long learning in the broadest context of technological
change
Project Management and Finance - Demonstrate
knowledge and understanding of engineering and
PO12 management principles and apply these to one’s own work,
as a member and leader in a team, to manage projects and
in multidisciplinary environments.
Course Outcomes are the statements that
describe what the students are expected to know
and able to perform by the end of the course. The
student attributions in the Course Outcomes are
categorized according to the learning domain as
they are listed in the Bloom’s Taxonomy domains
which are; Cognitive, Affective and Psychomotor
domain. The Faculty of Mechanical Engineering,
UiTM correlates the relation of the Program
Outcomes and Course Outcomes using the Course
Outcomes-Program Outcomes (CO-PO) matrix in
the curriculum structures. Thus, each of the offered
courses has their own CO-PO matrix.
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Thermal Engineering Course
Thermal Engineering is one of the core courses that
are offered in semester 5 by the faculty to the
students of Bachelor of Mechanical Engineering
programs. The course combines heat transfer and
thermodynamics analysis as outlined in Table 2.
The course is delivered with 3 hours of lecture and
1 hour of tutorial per week. Total summation of
lecture and tutorial is 42 hours and 14 hours,
respectively.
Table 2 Thermal Engineering Syllabus Outline
Chapter Title Hours
1 Thermodynamics and Heat Transfer, 3
Energy and Sustainability
2 Conduction 7
3 Convection 6
4 Heat Exchanger 5
5 Combustion 6
6 Refrigeration Cycles 7
7 Air-conditioning Processes 7
The course begins with the introduction of
thermodynamics and heat transfer and the relations
with energy utilization and environmental
sustainability. The fundamentals of heat transfer
mechanisms of conduction, convection, and
radiation are also briefly introduced. Chapters 2 and
3 covers in further detail the analytical
methodologies for conduction and convection
mechanisms while chapter 4 focuses on applied
heat transfer system of heat exchangers.
Thermodynamic systems with heat transfer
applications are then introduced in chapters 5 to 7.
The principles of combustion are taught as the
technology is a widely applied method of heat
generation. Finally, refrigeration and air
conditioning principles are introduced with respect
to major energy transfer applications.
Course Outcomes
There are 5 Course Outcomes listed in the Thermal
Engineering syllabus and they are given in Table 3.
Table 3 Course Outcomes for Thermal Engineering
Course Outcomes Bloom’s
Domain
CO1 Describe the principles of heat transfer Cognitive
mechanisms, combustion, refrigeration and
air conditioning systems in its fundamental
aspect with relation to existing energy
systems
CO2 Apply relationship between theoretical and Cognitive
practical aspects of heat transfer application
CO3 Analyse principles of energy mechanisms Cognitive
to solve a wide range of thermal
engineering problems
CO4 Develop solutions for mathematical models Cognitive
and propose appropriate results for thermal
engineering applications
CO5 Explain the importance of efficient energy Affective
utilization in engineering practices and its
impact on the environment as part of the
need for sustainable development

Table 4 CO-PO Matrix for Thermal Engineering
PO1 PO2 PO3 PO4 PO5
CO1 x
CO2 x
CO3 x
CO4 x
CO5
The Course Outcomes 1 to 4 contributes to level
2 to 5 of the cognitive domain in the Bloom’s
Taxonomy. Course Outcome 5 is correlated to the
level 3 of the affective domain. The Course
Outcomes and Program Outcomes are mapped into
the CO-PO matrix that is shown in the Table 4. The
table shows that the CO1 and CO2 contribute to the
PO1, CO3 is correlated to the PO2, CO4 contains
the solutions element that should be measured using
complex engineering problem and CO5 attributes to
the knowledge of the environmental sustainability.
Complex Engineering Problem in Thermal
Engineering
The new EAC has highlighted the Complex
Engineering Problems and Complex Engineering
Activities in Engineering Programme Accreditation
Manual. The Complex Engineering Problem is
linked in the PO1, PO2, PO3 and PO4. PO5 and
PO9 are correlated to the Complex Engineering
Activities. The characteristics of the Complex
Engineering Problem consist of a wide range of
technical, engineering and other related topics, it
provides no obvious solutions and it requires a
depth in engineering knowledge to solve the
problem. Meanwhile, the Complex Engineering
Activities involve a variety of resources such as
human, finance, information and materials and
require interaction between the technical,
engineering and other topics.
The Thermal Engineering course has 3 Program
Outcomes that are linked to the Complex
Engineering Problem (CEP). Therefore, an
innovative assessment was given to assess their
capabilities in solving with the Complex
Engineering Problem. The Complex Engineering
Problem has being implemented since 2013. Before
2012, the assignments that were provided to
students in Thermal Engineering course were based
merely on individual topics and Course Outcomes.
Complex Engineering Problem Assessment
In Semester 1 2013/2014 session, the students
were given a Complex Engineering Problem that
integrated all elements in the Thermal Engineering
course. The description of the assignment were
given in the mid of the semester. Thus, they have 7
weeks to complete the assessment in groups of 4 to
6th IEEE International Conference on Engineering Education (ICEED) 2014
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
PO6 PO7 PO8 PO9 PO10 PO11 PO12
x
5 students. The objective of the assignment is for
the students to conduct a design modeling of an air
conditioning system.
Figure 1. Air Conditioning System Layout
Problem Statement
A simple ideal vapor-compression refrigeration
system using R-134a that is shown in Figure 1
provides a cooling effect for a room. An evaporator
of a refrigeration system is used to dissipate heat
from the air flow. It was determined that the air-
conditioned air is to be delivered at a rate of 2000
cfm, 18 oC and 60 % relative humidity. Students
were required to perform preliminary design
analysis according to the guidelines provided
below:
1. Air conditioning Process
a. Provide sketch of the air-conditioning
processes on psychrometric chart.
b. Determine the required heat extraction rate
at the cooling coil section and heating rate in
the heater section.
2. Heat exchanging process involving convection
and conduction process.
The conditioned air flows in PVC vinyl pipe.
The pipe passes through a large room whose
temperature is 30°C.
a. Select appropriate nominal diameter of the
pipe.
b. Analyze the possible insulator that can be
used and determine its radius.
3. Refrigeration Process
a. Select appropriate design pressures for the
condenser and evaporator.
 6th IEEE International Conference on Engineering Education (ICEED) 2014
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

b. Calculate the mass flow rate and
approximate COP of the refrigeration cycle
if the R-134a is used as the working fluid.
c. Discuss all factors to be considered in the
selection of the refrigerant.
The students are required to state their assumptions
and the basis of selection of design parameters.
for each element and their link to the Course
Outcomes. From Table 5, the marks distribution for
CO2 is 15%, 20% for each CO1, CO3 and CO5 and
25 % for CO4. A rubric for the writing report
assessment was also provided to the student to
guide them attaining a better mark. This rubric
assists lecturers to have a common marking
scheme. Figure 3 shows the provided rubric which
describes all the elements in the report content. The
rubric gives benchmarks for Excellent, Acceptable
and Poor criteria.

Figure 2 Example of a cross flow with 6 tube-passes

cooling coil. The fins are connected perpendicular to
the tubes (not shown in diagram)
4. Heat exchanger analysis of the evaporator and
cooling coil. An example of the evaporator is
shown in Figure 2.
The cooling coil is a cross flow heat exchanger.
The refrigerant flows in the tube section while
the heat transfer surface area on the air side is
maximized using fins. Based on the air-
conditioning and evaporator requirement as
specified earlier in this assignment, estimate and
propose a preliminary design of the tube portion
of the heat exchanger. The parameter that was
decided should be specified as the diameter,
length and number of passes. The students need
to list all the assumptions and properties used in
their analysis

Table 5 Marks Distribution and Related Course

Outcome Figure 3 Rubric for Report Writing Assessment
Table 6 Rating Scheme
Content Marks
[CO1] Introduction 15 % Rating Range KPI
Application of engineering 15 %
[CO2] Very Poor 0 – 19% Failed
principles and concepts
Integration mathematical 15 % Poor 20 – 49% Failed
[CO4]
Solutions Moderate 50 – 69% Pass
Environmental aspects and 20 %
[CO5]
societal impact Good 70 – 84 % Pass
Interpretation of results and 20 % Excellent 85 – 100% Pass
[CO3]
discussion Each Course Outcomes that were obtained by
[CO4] Conclusion 10 % the students were recorded. Then, the data were
[CO1] Utilization of resources 5% analyzed. Equation (1) gives the student attainment
Total Assessment Value 100 % which is evaluated by dividing the obtained marks
to the maximum possible marks for each Course
Outcomes.
Report Format
s
(1)
The students are provided with a reporting format. m m s o
They are required to submit the report with the where x is in percentage. Then, the x value is
contents and their marks distribution according to evaluated according to Table 6 for determining the
Table 5. The table shows the mark contributions rating category. The Faculty of Mechanical
 6th IEEE International Conference on Engineering Education (ICEED) 2014
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Engineering has set the Key Performance Index

(KPI) of the CO achievement to have 100% of 200
Course Outcome 2
students to achieve minimum 50% marks.

Number of Students
150 172
Result and Discussion 152

The results are analyzed according to the 100

achievement of the Course Outcomes. The 89
Complex Engineering Problem was a common 50
assignment for all 14 classes that were taken 52 47
Thermal Engineering course in the semester 1 0
2013/2014. The total number of the students is 512. Very Poor Poor Moderate Good Excellent
The mean values of the Course Outcomes Rating Level
achievement are summarized in Table 7.
Figure 5 CO2 Achievement
Table 7 Mean Values for Course Outcomes
Achievement Course Outcome 3
200
CO1 63% Moderate 195

Number of Students
150
CO2 66% Moderate
CO3 67% Moderate 100 117
104
CO4 74% Good
CO5 70% Good 50 61
35
Overall 71% Good 0
The mean value for the CO1 achievement is Very Poor Poor Moderate Good Excellent
63% and it is at Moderate level. Figure 4 shows the Rating Level
achievement for the CO1. The highest number of
students is achieved in the Good level, follows by Figure 6 CO3 Achievement
Moderate level. Only 19 students show Very Poor
level. 200
Course Outcome 4
Number of Students

178
200
Course Outcome 1 150
148
127
Number of Students

100
150 168
145
50
100
104 18 41
76 0
50
19 Very Poor Poor Moderate Good Excellent
Rating
0
Very Poor Poor Moderate Good Excellent Figure 7 CO4 Achievement
Rating Level

Figure 4 CO1 Achievement 250

Course Outcome 5

Figure 5 shows the CO2 achievements for the

Number of Students

200
students. The highest number of 172 students has 192
attained Good level. It is the followed with the 150
Moderate level with 152 students. Poor level has 145
the lowest number of 47 students. The mean value 100
106
for the CO2 is 66% which is at Moderate level.
50
32 37
The CO3 achievement is shown in Figure 6. 0
There is only 35 students have achieved Poor level. Very Poor Poor Moderate Good Excellent
The Good level has the highest number of students Rating Level
which is 195. The mean value for CO3 is 67%
which is at the Moderate level. Figure 8 CO5 Achievement
Figure 7 shows the CO4 achievements from the
given assignment. 178 students have achieved the
 6th IEEE International Conference on Engineering Education (ICEED) 2014
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Good level which is the highest number in the CO5. least achieve 50% of the marks. The CO1 requires
There is only 18 students have achieved Very Poor the students to describe and interpret the given
level. The mean value for the CO4 is 74% which is problem in their own words and utilize the
the Good level and this is the highest mean value publication resources such books, engineering
for all Course Outcomes. standard, proceeding papers and journals. The
attainment has shown that the students are less
The CO5 is the only affective domain that is expressive in reporting the problem.
covered in the Thermal Engineering Course
Outcomes while the other outcomes are based on The highest KPI is achieved for the CO4 where
cognitive evaluation. The mean value for the CO5 the students have to give a mathematical solution to
achievement is 70% which is at Good level. The solve Complex Engineering Problem. In the CO4,
CO5 achievement is shown in Figure 8. There are students are required to adapt the mathematical
32 students that have attained Very Poor level and solution into the engineering problem. They need to
192 students that have achieved Good level. choose a correct equation to solve them. For
example, the Reynolds number of air flow must be
examined so that the type of flow can be identified.
250 Overall Marks
Subsequently, a correspond Nusselt number
equation can be used to determine the heat
Number of Students

200
206 convection coefficient, h.
150
Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI)
138
100 Analysis
108
50 The CQI analysis is done to improve the
17
43 assessment method for the given Complex
0 Engineering Problem. Feedbacks were collected
Very Poor Poor Moderate Good Excellent from the lectures and students. The students
Rating Level reporting outcome was also evaluated to improve
the rubrics criteria. There are several issues that
Figure 9 Overall Marks Achievement were deduced from this assessment method.
Figure 9 shows the Overall marks that are
achieved by the students. The mean value of the Language Capability
Overall marks is 71 % which is at Good level. The The main issue that was highlighted by lectures
highest number of students achieved Good level is poor English writing and comprehension. One of
with a total of 206 students. Then, it is followed by the lecturers highlighted the need to spend more
the Moderate level with 138 students. The Very than 3 hours in describing the assignments during
Poor level has the lowest number which is at 17 class as the students lacks understanding on the
students. given problem. The technical report writing must
also be improved. There are many typos and
KPI Achievement grammar mistakes were found in the report. The
100% sentence structure must be improved too. Many
76% 81% 81% 88% 87% 88% lecturers found their student doing plagiarism. It is
Percentage of Students

80% suggested that, the technical report must be checked

Pass using Turnitin software before submission to
60%
Failed minimize this issue in the future.
40%
Difficulty Level
20% Another issue is the level of difficulty of the
24% 19% 19% 13% 12%
given assignment. A comprehensive explanation
12%
0% will be provided to improve the student
CO1 CO2 CO3 CO4 CO5 Overall comprehension level in executing the assignment.
Course Outcome
Also, the description of the assignment will be
improved where a clear and concise instruction with
Figure 10 KPI Achievements for all Course Outcomes
analytical guidelines will be provided. However,
The KPI measures the percentage of students the main characteristic for the Complex
that have attained each Course Outcomes at the Engineering Problem of having no obvious solution
given minimum passing mark which is set at 50% will be maintained.
(refer to Table 6). Figure 10 shows the KPI
achievement for the Complex Engineering Problem Summary
assignment. The CO1 has the lowest KPI
The Complex Engineering Problem was
achievement which is 76% of the students has at
implemented in the Thermal Engineering course
 6th IEEE International Conference on Engineering Education (ICEED) 2014
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

following to the requirement from EAC guideline.

The designed assignment was capable to measure
all of the Course Outcomes of the syllabus. The
results show that the CO4 has the highest
achievement where the mean value is 74 % which is
at the Good level. Then, it is followed by the CO5
with 70% at Good level. The CO3, CO2 and CO1
are in the Moderate level with 67%, 66% and 61%
of the mean value; respectively.

The KPI is set to achieve 100% of the students

attain a minimum of 50% marks. None of the
Course Outcomes have achieved the KPI. The
highest achievement is obtained from CO4 with
88% of the students attained at least 50%. The
lowest KPI achievement is the CO5 with76% of the
students achieving the minimum marks.

The implementation of the Complex

Engineering Problem is continued in the Semester 2
2013/2014. The Continuous Quality Improvement
(CQI) for the assignment is conducted to improve
the assessment process. All the feedbacks from
lecturers and students are taken into account in the
improvement process.

References
1. Board of Engineers Malaysia (BEM),
Engineering Programme Accreditation
Manual (2012), October 2012.

View publication stats