CFD Project

Teacher's name: Elisabet Mas de les Valls

Time: Transformation of the entire subject

Methodology: Project-based learning, Follow-up activities, Feminist pedagogy

Class-group size: <= 15 students

Level of studies: Master's

Degree, semester within the degree and subject: MUEN, Q2, Computational Fluid Dynamics Applied to Nuclear Technology.

Possible adaptation of the activity to other subjects: Extrapolable to other similar subjects

Activity description:

This is a project that is carried out throughout the course in PBL mode. The project itself is the numerical study of some phenomenon of heat transfer in fluids related to the field of nuclear technology.

The project serves to see the applied part of the theory taught throughout the course.

The characteristic points that make this project a good practice are:

• The subject of study is decided by the students, although it must always be within the scope of nuclear technology and must include fluids and heat transfer. The choice is made as follows:
  • Each student looks for a magazine article related to a topic that they like and prepares an entry in the Atenea forum explaining the topic, what the study could be and giving the reference to the article from which they got the idea.
  • Everyone comments on the other colleagues' proposals until consensus is reached. Mainly this dialogue is done via Atenea (it is one of the assessable tasks) but if there are no concerns, it is just decided in class.
  • Once the topic has been decided, each student must read a couple of articles on that topic. Articles cannot be repeated. A common database is made with the information of the articles read.
  • Already in groups of 3/4 students, a presentation is prepared based on the articles read and proposing a specific phenomenon to be studied (it can be an optimization of geometry, the study of secondary flows, ...).
  • We discuss the proposals after the presentations and have just decided which study we will carry out. Each group will do the same study but with some small variation, in the form of a parametric study to be able to better understand the phenomenon and at the same time be able to help each other between teams thanks to the similarity between the different studies.
• Gender analysis of the field of study. The database that is created cooperatively includes not only technical aspects of the published studies, but also the gender analysis of the authorship and of the person responsible for the research team. In addition, in this way they also get to know the journals most involved with the subject of study and the leading research groups. The data disaggregated by sex (note that we are only based on the name and, sometimes, on a photograph) is compared with the prediction of the student body itself in a test answered at the beginning of the year. This opens up some debate about the current situation and what measures could be incorporated to achieve parity.
• The final assessment of the subject includes a written and individual exam with open questions related to the theory and applied to the project. For example, an evolution of a temperature over time is shown where it is seen that there are numerical instabilities, the physical and numerical conditions with which that result was obtained (which coincide with those of the project) are indicated and they are asked to explain the causes of these instabilities. In this exam it is very clear who has achieved the knowledge and whether they have understood the study carried out throughout the project. But since during the year the students are very focused on completing all the deliverables on time (which are weekly), they often forget to really study the theory and when they need it to understand numerical study problems, they don't they have it at hand. This, in addition, led to very low final exam grades. To avoid this situation, two pilot exams (but with assessment weight) of the same style as the final have been held throughout the course. These exams could be taken with the notes, but without the internet. The effect of these trainings on the grade of the final exam has been very positive, although no question was obviously repeated.
• After the final exam, there is a 30-minute break and a role-play. This role-play involves prior preparation, the role-play itself, and a space for subsequent analysis and debate:
  • Each team (which I usually have 3 or 4) chooses a team role that includes the engineering group that did the study, the engineering lead team that did the study, the company that requests the study to be able to design a new component/reactor/… and the nuclear safety company that validates both the process and the results.

• Each member of a team defines their individual role: name, position, personal interests, work interests, hobbies, what they expect from the meeting and their strategy during the meeting. This is also an assessable deliverable.
• On the day of the role-play, the students are left to self-manage the whole process. There is only the condition that the team representing the engineers who did the study present the study (or the part of the study that they are interested in presenting) with an oral presentation. The role-play usually lasts almost 60 minutes and has always flowed very well.
• When the students finish the role-play, not only the technical aspects are analyzed but also more aspects of team management, of tactics followed, of non-verbal language, etc.

Team work:

The teams are made up of 3-4 people, preferably 3. They form freely and since there have always been very few girls (maximum 2 and they have not been put together), it has not been relevant to talk about the gender distribution of the members of the teams.

The project is progressing every week. This implies that:

• At the beginning of the class, the work delivered during the week is discussed, its quality and how to improve it. The teacher notes the time they spend on it, as they are often lost at the beginning of the school year and they need to be guided so that they don't spend too much time on the tasks.
• We continue to advance the theory or study of the phenomenon and indicate how to do it with the OpenFOAM software. A little time is given so that each student individually advances in the study. It is important that each student works with their computer in the classroom to ensure learning. Obviously they do it distributed in teams and the members of the same team help each other.
• The instructions are given (and left in writing to Atenea) by the following deliverable. The vast majority of deliverables are in teams, but from time to time some individual ones are placed.

Activity evaluation system and impact on the evaluation of the subject:

In this subject every week the students have to present something, either in the forum, a task or an oral presentation. These jobs are often in a team, but not all. The following figure shows an idea of ​​the subject's evaluation system:

The deliverables have a specific weight that is adapted depending on the hours of work they involve.

Promotion of attendance in the classroom:

It is a subject where theory and practice are combined every day. Therefore, attendance is essential. There is no grade corresponding to attendance, but it will inevitably affect the different tasks.

Only in one year was there any repeated offense and it was clearly observed how the cause was a single student who dragged the members of his team. Since then, it is discussed in class that it is assumed that everyone will actively attend all classes and there have been no further problems.

Evidence of student assessment:

Traditionally this subject has been rated with a 5/5 except for one year, in which it was rated with a 3/5. That year the simulations were quite difficult and the students were working with different versions of the OpenFOAM code, so actually getting numerical results from the case study was very difficult and somewhat chaotic (depending on the version of the student). 

The students are very grateful:

1. Continuous work, with precise instructions and individualized follow-up that gives them the opportunity to correct mistakes
2. Flexibility in the deadlines for submissions at the end of the semester, when they are combined with the submissions of other subjects
3. The constant dialogue to find out how the subject is doing and the points that need to be worked on more
4. Combining theory with practice

Despite the initial resistance to carry out a role-play at the end of the subject, everyone ends up enjoying it very much and thanking them for including it.

Some girls have thanked me very much for talking about the still existing gender inequalities in engineering and for opening the debate to propose corrective actions. 

Proportion of hours dedicated by the teaching staff to the hours dedicated by the students:

The calculation is teacher hours / student hours. Faculty hours include preparation, execution and evaluation. Studentship hours include both in-classroom and out-of-classroom work.

As it is designed, the subject is very nice, but it involves some risk for the teachers (since the subject of the project is chosen by the students) and a lot of work. Assignments should be reviewed week by week to give feedback and reorient the classes. The simulations should be tested before the students do them. Therefore, we would be talking about a dedication of 1/2.

Recommendation for colleagues when implementing this activity:

It is always risky to design projects with students, as the challenge posed may turn out to be too complex. To ensure that the progress of the project is fluid it is necessary to: 

1. The topic agreed upon with the students should not be excessively complex and, if possible, that the teacher already has previous experience.
2. That all students work with the same version of the software. If it is done in the computer classrooms, this point is covered by default, but if it is done with the students' personal computers, due to the different operating systems, it can be a critical point to solve.

It is difficult for students to get into the routine of participation and continuous work. The first sessions are for adaptation and it is not unusual to have to grade some of the assignments with a 0 since the students did not believe that they really had to do work every week. But after a couple of weeks everyone starts to pick up the pace and the subject flows well. 

For the proper functioning of the role-play it is necessary:

1. Define very clearly the general roles (not the individual ones) by the teacher
2. That the student prepares his own role in advance: that he defines his preferences and objectives (not only work), how he will approach the meeting and what he hopes to get out of it.
3. Allow students to adapt the environment where the role-play will take place
4. Do not intervene in the role-play, nor in the distribution of the space, nor in how they plan to start it (you learn a lot from seeing who takes the lead, how they present themselves, ...)
5. Analyze technical aspects at the end of the role-play, expanding knowledge. It is a very good time to give the latest technical indications.
6. Analyze social aspects observed in the role-play. Who takes the lead, who has respected their initial role and who hasn't, which gender roles appear... It's even a very good time to give them directions for their working life, how to transmit information, how to be more credible, … It's a time when they're relaxed and relaxed, they've had a good time and they're very open and receptive to new directions.

In order to reduce the dedication of the teaching staff it is recommended:

1. Design deliverables that are easy to review. For example, as a result of a simulation you can request a specific temperature profile (a good quality image) and a paragraph explaining the observed phenomenon. No long reports for weekly deliverables.
2. There is only one long document to deliver, which is done in teams, and consists of the writing of an article with the theoretical foundations applied to a simple case (with Python). To correct it quickly, Atenea shows the criteria already organized in the sections of the document. There is no document with the results of the project, only the exam and the role-play