bridging the gap between academics and practice: a capstone design experience
TRANSCRIPT
quires audents the
engineersl emphasis isher projecta construc-senior level
Dow
nloa
ded
from
asc
elib
rary
.org
by
Flor
ida
Atla
ntic
Uni
vers
ity o
n 09
/30/
13. C
opyr
ight
ASC
E. F
or p
erso
nal u
se o
nly;
all
righ
ts r
eser
ved.
Bridging the Gap between Academics and Practice:A Capstone Design Experience
Awad S. Hanna1 and Kenneth T. Sullivan2
Abstract: As part of graduation requirements, the Department of Civil Engineering at the University of Wisconsin-Madison reminimum of one three credits course in a capstone design experience. The main objective of this course is to allow stopportunity of undertaking and completing an open-ended design project. Supervision of the projects is performed by practicingand department faculty. The course is a practice oriented design class that integrates several civil engineering areas. Speciaplaced on integrating constructability concepts with structural engineering, mechanical systems, electrical systems, and otdetails. Student groups not only complete project designs, but also perform feasibility studies, value engineering, and preparetion schedule and cost estimate based on the designs they have generated. The objective of this paper is to describe thecapstone design experience at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)1052-3928(2005)131:1(59)
CE Database subject headings: Universities; Professional practices; Engineering services; Engineering education.
En-s aexpe-s theesigncinge ori-areascon-tricalcom-aluet esti
cap-ison.study
e fallssible
torctors.a dif-
rk so
rvelve-
pro-as a
cep-the
rs in
ge-per-
strianlleythatwaybeendgesdered
he re-ts ton an-cost
becultyith thents ind con-mini-f the
. ofDr.,
ring,ring
musoneitor.sibleThis-N
Introduction
As part of graduation requirements, the Department of Civilgineering at the University of Wisconsin-Madison requireminimum of one three credits course in a capstone designrience. The main objective of this course is to allow studentopportunity of undertaking and completing an open-ended dproject. Supervision of the projects is performed by practiengineers and department faculty. The course is a practicented design class that integrates several civil engineeringSpecial emphasis is placed on integrating constructabilitycepts with structural engineering, mechanical systems, elecsystems, and other project details. Students groups not onlyplete project designs, but also perform feasibility studies, vengineering, and prepare a construction schedule and cosmate based off of the designs they have generated.
The objective of this paper is to describe the senior levelstone design experience at the University of Wisconsin-MadThe fall 1998 capstone class will be used, as a simple caseto illustrate the benefits of the capstone design experience.
Background
To select an appropriate path for a capstone project for thsemester of 1998, the course instructor examined many po
1Professor, Dept. of Civil and Environmental Engineering, UnivWisconsin, Madison, 2314 Engineering Hall, 1415 EngineeringMadison, WI 53706.
2Graduate Student, Dept. of Civil and Environmental EngineeUniv. of Wisconsin, Madison, 2320 Engineering Hall, 1415 EngineeDr., Madison, WI 53706.
Note. Discussion open until June 1, 2005. Separate discussionsbe submitted for individual papers. To extend the closing date bymonth, a written request must be filed with the ASCE Managing EdThe manuscript for this paper was submitted for review and pospublication on October 3, 2000; approved on February 21, 2003.paper is part of theJournal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, Vol. 131, No. 1, January 1, 2005. ©ASCE, ISS
1052-3928/2005/1-59–62/$25.00.JOURNAL OF PROFESSIONAL ISSUES IN ENGINE
J. Prof. Issues Eng. Educ. Pr
.
-
,
projects. While looking for a real-world problem, the instruccommunicated with counties, cities, design firms, and contraThe selection of the appropriate project for the course wasficult process for the following reasons:1. The project needed to contain the correct amount of wo
that students could complete it in one semester.2. Availability and willingness of practicing engineers to se
and provide their experience to the students. The invoment of practicing engineers is substantial in terms ofviding advice, meeting with the students, and actingsource for local and national codes.
3. The project should be a real-world project and in the contual stage. Redesigning old projects was avoided to allowstudents the opportunity to work with practicing engineedeveloping different alternatives and design options.
4. Availability of an owner’s representative who is knowledable about the project and able to provide the owner’sspective and requirements.
The project that was selected was the design of four pedebridges for the Kickapoo Valley Reserve. The Kickapoo VaReserve is a small rural community in Southwest Wisconsincontains approximately 8,000 acres of land. An old state hightraversed the middle of the reserve but this highway hasrelocated with its bridges removed. Since the highway brihad been removed, much of the reserve land has been reninaccessible. To provide access to the landlocked areas, tserve was in need of four pedestrian bridges. Initial attempsolicit consultants to perform a preliminary design resulted iunreasonable expense. The reserve was looking for new lowideas for the proposed pedestrian bridges.
In the summer of 1998, the faculty members that wouldteaching the course visited the Kickapoo Reserve. The faexamined the site and discussed the bridge requirements wowner. It was revealed that the reserve had many requiremeterms of the cost, aesthetics, maintenance, environment, anstruction. All of these criteria needed to be addressed with amal amount of funding. Due to a small budget, the director o
t
reserve inquired whether students could design the bridges. It was
ERING EDUCATION AND PRACTICE © ASCE / JANUARY 2005 / 59
act. 2005.131:59-62.
esti-, andguideional
emicg inquir-d ontives
in ainte-con-me-
orknsi-ost
theon
on-
tionrmal
itio-cernsact,
tionalesignhowsed
uiredare,
naireiningesigndes-, thedentkills.sum-four
g theGPSft-
ly orants.r eac
nsult-typi-and
ses-en byallo-prac-mmonim-rets of
ableshind.
andpactterimuctor,erve.werector
en thesstypicalTwoto theseinally,s partn theed.dent’s
imilarraffic,Also,rmed. Ad-soe to
desireor theridgewashilebilityue tos ofue to
elop a
tion,con-finaleven-cost
Dow
nloa
ded
from
asc
elib
rary
.org
by
Flor
ida
Atla
ntic
Uni
vers
ity o
n 09
/30/
13. C
opyr
ight
ASC
E. F
or p
erso
nal u
se o
nly;
all
righ
ts r
eser
ved.
determined that students could perform preliminary site invgations, create preliminary designs, perform cost estimatescreate a final design. These final designs would be used as afor the reserve and could be later transferred to a professengineer for review and approval.
Course Objectives
The main objective of the capstone course was to apply acadknowledge to a practical problem. The students participatinthe course were given a practical civil engineering project reing considerable technical knowledge, and were evaluatetheir performance in a professional environment. Other objecincluded1. The integration of several civil engineering disciplines
real-world open-ended design problem: the studentsgrated knowledge from surveying, structural analysis,structability, environmental engineering, hydraulics, soilchanics, estimating, and scheduling.
2. The promotion of teamwork by allowing the students to win groups with members of different expertise and respobilities: it should be noted that teamwork was one of the mdifficult aspect of this course. The instructor providedstudents with a professional facilitator to provide advicehow to accomplish the teams’ objectives with minimum cflict.
3. The improvement of verbal and written communicaskills: this was accomplished by the presentations and foreports required by the course.
4. The promotion of student interaction with outside practners: students were required to learn about practical consuch as permitting, public hearing, environmental impand historical preservation.
5. To increase student awareness to cost and time: in tradidesign courses, students’ main concerns are on how to dsafe and stable structures with little consideration onmuch it costs and how long it takes to build the propodesign.
6. To use technology to solve problems: students were reqto use the latest technology in terms of software, hardwand presentation technology.
Course Structure
On the first day of class, the instructor distributed a questionto determine each student’s particular strengths. After determwhere student strengths and experiences existed, four dbuild “companies” were formed; one company for each petrian bridge needed by the reserve. In forming the groupsinstructor took into consideration the background of each stuin terms of course work, summer experience, and unique sFor example, it was found that five students have extensivemer work in surveying, those students were distributed to thedifferent groups to provide leadership and knowledge in usinstate-of-the-art surveying equipment ranging from using(geographic positioning system) to specialized surveying soware.
To provide a consulting service to each group on a weekbiweekly basis, the instructor contacted practicing consultThese consultants also acted as a resource of knowledge fo
group by providing them with information outside his/her area of60 / JOURNAL OF PROFESSIONAL ISSUES IN ENGINEERING EDUCATIO
J. Prof. Issues Eng. Educ. Pr
/
h
expertise. In addition to the classical design issues, the coants provided the students with advice in areas that are notcally part of a civil engineering curriculum, such as permitspermit requirements.
The framework for the fall 1998 course consisted of twosions per week. One session was allocated for lectures, givfaculty and practicing professionals. The other session wascated for progress reviews by the faculty and the assignedticing engineers. The lectures addressed general issues coto all projects(teamwork, contract documents, environmentalpacts, material selection, bridge type, etc.). These lectures wegiven to coincide with student work on particular componenthe project.
Evaluation of the course was based on specific deliverthat were required to ensure that students did not fall beThese deliverables included a topographic map, a feasibilityvalue engineering study, interim report, environmental imstatement, and a structural analysis and final report. The inand final reports were evaluated and analyzed by the instrpracticing consultants and the director of the Kickapoo ResFeedback on the interim report was given and correctionsmade to facilitate a more competent final report. The instruused the other deliverables such as design minutes(notes on thstudents meetings outside of class as related to their work odesign portion of the project) to monitor the students’ progrethroughout the semester. These deliverables representedactivities required to complete a civil engineering design.final presentations were required: one to the owner and oneCollege of Engineering(COE) faculty and students. Also thepresentations were used to evaluate the students’ efforts. Fstudents were required to evaluate fellow group members aof the peer-evaluation process. Students were evaluated olevel of involvement and the quality of work they completThese evaluations were also used in determining each stufinal grade.
Scope of the Project
The four bridges to be designed had similar scopes but dissconstraints. Each bridge was required to carry pedestrian twhich included horseback riders, bikers, hikers, and skiers.the reserve indicated that snow removal would not be perforegularly so consideration of snow load would be necessaryditionally, the Kickapoo River has a high flooding frequencylateral forces due to water also required consideration. Dufrequent flooding and logjams, the reserve expressed thenot to have piers located in the streambed. Site constraints ffour bridges varied. The average length of a single-span bwas 85 ft but ranged from 60–140 ft. Access to the sites alsovariable; one site was accessible from multiple directions wthe other three sites where accessible from only one. The ato get equipment and materials to each site also differed ddiffering terrain. The lack of access and the variable lengthspan created interesting construction and design concerns. Dthe variance of the bridge sites, each group was able to devdesign different from the others.
Each group performed topographic mapping, site exploravalue engineering, structural design, hydraulic studies, and astruction schedule for their bridge. The reserve required adesign that could be checked by a licensed professional andtually put into place. The reserve also wanted an approximate
estimate for each site. This cost estimate would be used by theN AND PRACTICE © ASCE / JANUARY 2005
act. 2005.131:59-62.
wasner
. Fi-e theed itsimate
nta-llegetech-whatnta-topo-The
townen to
Thisas thesign
ge foreer-ngi-
native
Cost
.00
0.00
.00
0.00
0.00
d
.50
.50
50
0.00
0.00
2.50
.00
.14
80
00
8.80
4.00
8.44
5.40
9.20
ier
Dow
nloa
ded
from
asc
elib
rary
.org
by
Flor
ida
Atla
ntic
Uni
vers
ity o
n 09
/30/
13. C
opyr
ight
ASC
E. F
or p
erso
nal u
se o
nly;
all
righ
ts r
eser
ved.
reserve to estimate the feasibility of the projects. Each groupallowed to choose its own bridge style and material. The owdid express a preference toward a wood bridge if possiblenally, the student design groups were allowed to determinfoundation and deck materials. Again, the reserve expressdesire to have these items be wood as well. A typical cost estis shown in Table 1.
The final requirement of the project was two formal presetions. The first presentation was made to members of the Coof Engineering faculty and students. This presentation wasnical in nature and was given to illustrate to the audiencelevel of effort and detail was put into the project. This presetion was to describe the structural analysis, cost estimating,graphic mapping, and other technical parts of the project.
Table 1. Cost Estimate
Description Cost code Quantity Un
General requirements 100000000
Equipment rental
Crane 151000000 2.0 Da
Backhoe loader 152000000 2.0 We
Mobilization
Crane 164601150 1.0 LS
Backhoe loader 164080320 1.0 L
Site work 200000000
Seeding and mulch 293041600 400.0 S
Grading 221040040 400.0 SY
Silt fence 227041300 350.0 LF
Excavation 222502000 170.0 C
Rip-rap 227120100 24.5 CY
Concrete 300000000
Concrete pump truck 310000000 2.0 L
Place concrete 320000000 22.0 C
Metals 500000000
Stell girders 512207600 20,800.0 Po
Steel diaphrams 512207650 5,842.0 po
Wood 600000000
Decking 611000000 2,880.0 FB
Rail posts 612000000 147.0 FB
Railing 613000000 427.0 FBM
Bracing 614000000 156.0 FB
Plank construction 611500000 160.0 ea
Post connections 612500000 18.0 e
0.539 in. lag screws 612550000 36.0 ea
0.539 in. carriage bolts 612530000 260.0 ea
Washers 612570000 560.0 ea
Total estimated cost
Table 2. Value Engineering Study
Criteria Value factor G
Aesthetics 0.35
Environmental impact 0.10
Cost 0.25
Constructability 0.15
Operation and maintenance 0.15
Total adjusted value —
JOURNAL OF PROFESSIONAL ISSUES IN ENGINE
J. Prof. Issues Eng. Educ. Pr
second presentation was made to the owner at a publicmeeting. This presentation was nontechnical and was givillustrate why the chosen design was being recommended.presentation focused on reasons why the selected bridge wbest, how the bridge could be built, and why the group’s dewas the best for the owner.
Analysis
The student groups were required to determine the best bridtheir particular site. To complete this objective, a value engining study was performed. Table 2 displays a typical value eneering comparison. The students selected a group of alter
Material Labor Equipment Unit Cost Total
— 750 970 — 3,440
— 1,300 1,100 — 4,80
— — — 1,000.00 1,000
— — — 2,500.00 2,50
— — — 0.40 16
— — — — include
— — — 1.25 437
— — — 2.25 382
— — — 25.00 612.
— — — 600.00 1,20
— — — 280.00 61,60
26,000.00
— — — 1.25 7,30
— — — 1.25
1.50 — — — 4,320
0.62 — — — 91
1.40 — — — 597.
1.50 — — — 234.
2.93 — — — 46
3.00 — — — 5
0.79 — — — 2
0.79 — — — 20
0.32 — — — 17
59,706.74
Option
girder Steel girder Steel girder with p
0.00 8.0 6.00
8.00 8.0 3.00
.00 9.0 10.00
.00 7.0 9.00
3.00 10.0 6.00
7.05 8.4 7.15
it
y
ek
S
Y
Y
S
Y
und
und
M
M
M
ch
ach
ch
ch
ch
lulam
1
5
7
ERING EDUCATION AND PRACTICE © ASCE / JANUARY 2005 / 61
act. 2005.131:59-62.
ria asthet-ting
ativeined
ight-finaleter-. Byridgee orlo-var-
irder,
finalctionr sup-nputcom-eachst andfromvari-nlyof theetterents. Thed. Ths for
sultsnder-des-ienceservepe of
theownn so-ble. Thisuallynded
ex-ience
anina-the
rs towere
udentn any
stu-o thedeliv-
theird theism of
sitive.ex-
applyThiss and
is tonals.ersoncred-to beo an-wise,ofes-
s thel-liferstandiron-stu-ouldvisitning
luatorcien-
e theffec-ngi-
ete aroupsr theareas
ermine, theer the
in re-ementd it
roupster’student
r pro-were
ll oforld
dentsy of
pro-sign.es in
Dow
nloa
ded
from
asc
elib
rary
.org
by
Flor
ida
Atla
ntic
Uni
vers
ity o
n 09
/30/
13. C
opyr
ight
ASC
E. F
or p
erso
nal u
se o
nly;
all
righ
ts r
eser
ved.
designs and then evaluated them using the important criteoutlined by the owner. These important criteria were cost, aesics, maintenance, environment, and constructability. A weighfactor was applied to each of these criteria. Each alternbridge design was then ranked and a final score was determAlso, each group conducted a sensitivity analysis on their weing factors. The weighting factors were changed and theresults checked. This sensitivity analysis was performed to dmine the dependency of the result on the weighting factorperforming a value engineering analysis, the overall best bwas chosen in favor of simply choosing the lowest cost bridgthe lowest maintenance bridge. Due to the variability of sitecations and owner requirements, the type of bridge selectedied among the four groups. One group selected a glu-lam gone selected a steel girder, and two selected steel trusses.
After the bridge type was chosen, each group began theirbridge design. Encountered in the final design were construproblems due to access restrictions, bridge length, and laboply. To determine feasible methods to build each bridge, iwas required of all members. Once the final design waspleted, plans were drawn and quantities calculated forbridge. Also generated for each bridge was an estimated coconstruction schedule. Costs for each group’s bridge ranged$60,000–$100,000. This large range in cost was due to theability in site conditions. It was important for students to not odesign the bridges but also determine the constructed costbridges. By determining construction cost and schedule, a bidea of true construction time was achieved. Finally, the studpresented their chosen bridge to the reserve for considerationreserve evaluated the students’ designs and was very pleasereserve now had some preliminary plans and cost estimatethe building of the four pedestrian bridges.
Win/Win
The Kickapoo Valley Reserve was very satisfied with the reof the design project. The reserve was able to get a better ustanding of the costs and procedures involved in building petrian bridges in the reserve. In this aspect, the learning expernot only applied to the students but the owner as well. The rewas also able to receive a variety of ideas regarding the tybridges that could be built in the reserve. Furthermore,amount of funding required to place the bridges was now knto the reserve. This knowledge allowed the reserve to begilicitation of funding for the bridges. Finally, the reserve was ato get preliminary designs, costs, and schedules at a low costlow-cost acquisition of the designs allowed the bridges to actbe constructed, a reality not possible due to the fees demawhen the reserve first began to approach consultants.
The students involved in this capstone experience wereposed to a real-world design experience. This design experallowed for the students to apply their engineering skills toactual problem. This valuable experience resulted in a culmtion of their educational knowledge. Also, students were givenopportunity to work with their peers and professional engineesolve problems. These problems had real-life constraints andopen-ended in nature. These real-life constraints exposed stto the multitude of obstacles and challenges that are faced idesign project. The open-ended nature of the project alloweddents to be creative and determine their own solutions. Alsstudents learned time-management skills due the required
62 / JOURNAL OF PROFESSIONAL ISSUES IN ENGINEERING EDUCATIO
J. Prof. Issues Eng. Educ. Pr
.
e
s
erables. Finally, the students had the opportunity to presentdesigns to the College of Engineering faculty, students, anowner. These presentations exposed students to public critictheir ideas.
Conclusions and Recommendations
Overall, student feedback from the capstone course was poThe ability to work in groups and with professionals was ancellent learning experience. Also, the students were able totheir engineering education to solve a real-world problem.real-world problem exposed students to the design procesthe constraints and complications involved.
An important characteristic of the capstone approachallow students to become involved with practicing professioThis involvement allows the students to share ideas with a pwho has performed the work before. The professional addsibility to the process because they know what tasks needperformed. Also, the professional can use their experience tswer questions that inexperienced students will have. Likestudents can gain valuable insight into how a practicing prsional would solve the problem that they are working on.
Another important feature of the capstone experience iuse of a real-world problem. By using a problem that has reaconstraints and owners, the students are able to better undehow engineering problems are solved in a professional envment. If a hypothetical project were selected, the ability fordent interaction with an owner or the physical environment wbe limited. The use of a real problem allows the students tothe site and become more involved in the project from planthrough construction.
Finally, the capstone design experience was a good evaof the undergraduate curriculum. Student strengths and deficies were clearly defined when they attempted to completdesign problem. These abilities are directly related to the etiveness of the undergraduate curriculum in the College of Eneering. Also, the availability of resources and tools to compldesign project were also evaluated. For example, many ghad troubles accessing topographic mapping software. Afteproject has been completed, faculty members can examinewhere students’ strengths and weaknesses were and detwhether changes in the curriculum are required or not. Alsocomputer resources and other tools can be evaluated aftproject has been completed.
Improvements to the capstone course have been madesponse to student feedback. One such change is the requirof more class time to work on the project. Many groups foundifficult to schedule a time period where all members of the gwere able to meet. Due to this problem, the future semecapstone classes were allowed one lecture a week for sgroup work.
The capstone experience as described within this papevides students with a valuable learning experience. Studentsallowed to culminate their college education by applying atheir previous education and experience to solve a real-wproblem. This problem was open ended, which allowed stusome creative latitude. Finally, as taught at the UniversitWisconsin-Madison, the senior level capstone design coursevided a project-driven approach to teaching engineering deThis teaching method can be applied to all capstone coursany discipline.
N AND PRACTICE © ASCE / JANUARY 2005
act. 2005.131:59-62.