A unique thermodynamics course

with laboratories
Margaret Bailey (corresponding author), Blace Albert, Ozer Arnas, Shawn Klawunder,
John Klegka and David Wolons
Department of Civil and Mechanical Engineering, United States Military Academy,
West Point, NY 10996, USA
E-mail: mbbeme@rit.edu

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, because of
its uniqueness and applicability. Students from every department in the USMA 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 focussing on very relevant applications. This paper
presents an overview of the thermodynamic experience created at the USMA and offers several
examples of methods to enhance similar courses at other institutions.

Keywords thermodynamics; laboratory experiences; undergraduate education

Introduction
The United States Military Academy (USMA) located in West Point, New York,
includes 13 different academic departments offering over 60 academic majors. While
pursuing a four-year college degree, the students who attend the USMA are also
training to serve as officers in the United States Army. 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 Department of Civil and
Mechanical Engineering offers an ABET-accredited degree in mechanical engineer-
ing (ME). Students enrolled in ME must successfully complete a course of study
very similar to that required by their peers at civilian institutions. Each year, approx-
imately 75 students select ME as a major and typically enroll in thermodynamics in
the first semester of their third year. However, regardless of academic major, all stu-
dents supplement their general education or core requirements at the USMA with a
5 course engineering sequence. Therefore, instructors of EM301, thermodynamics,
are challenged to teach this course to students majoring in a variety of areas, such
as foreign language, history, political science, as well as mechanical engineering.
The laws of thermodynamics are the same whether they are being 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. In fact, all students must take the same core curriculum,
including basic science courses (mathematics, physics, and chemistry). This foun-
dation provides the students with a common background from which to build,
regardless of academic major. The total annual enrollment in thermodynamics

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education 32/1

USMA thermodynamics course 55

typically reaches 500 students, roughly half of all eligible students. Large course
enrollment, coupled with the USMA’s restriction of a maximum of 18 students per
section, results in the creation of 13 to 15 thermodynamics sections per semester.
The course structure includes a lecture and laboratory component. There are 35
lectures, each 55 minutes in length, that follow a classic textbook. The topics covered
include definitions, pure substances, ideal equations of state, conservation of mass
and energy, and the second law. In order to enhance the students’ learning, several
applications are studied in detail, including steam power plants, air standard cycles,
emissions, vapor compression refrigeration systems, psychrometrics, and air condi-
tioning. A steam power plant tour and several laboratories further augment the lec-
tures. The laboratories focus on steam turbines, spark-ignition/compression-ignition
(SI/CI) engine comparison, cooperative fuel research (CFR) engines, and gas tur-
bines, each of which is discussed in later sections of this paper. The course includes
two 30-minute quizzes, two 55-minute tests, and a final cumulative examination.
Students taking the course for ABET credit also complete a design project.

Thermodynamics faculty
The EM301 faculty 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. Each senior military faculty holds
a PhD in a relevant discipline and typically has been on the faculty for 6 to 15 years,
which helps to provide continuity and stability. These individuals 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 to their colleagues at civilian colleges and universities. Civilian faculty hold a
PhD in a relevant discipline and comprise 20–25% of the overall faculty. The largest
component (60–65%) of the faculty are active-duty military officers, typically in
their seventh to twelfth year of service in the United States Army. The officers are
carefully selected to teach at the USMA for a period of three years, after the
completion of a master’s program in a relevant discipline at a civilian university.
Because of the large turnover in junior military faculty, each department at USMA
runs a ‘new instructor’ training program, during the summer before the first semes-
ter of instruction, in order to prepare incoming faculty for teaching. In the Depart-
ment of Civil and Mechanical Engineering, this program is called the Instructor
Summer Workshop (ISW). The ISW lasts six weeks and is structured to train the
instructors in effective teaching techniques. The aim of ISW is to provide an oppor-
tunity for new instructors to gain competence and confidence in the classroom.
The intensive ISW three-week experience begins with an introduction from the
department head and three-day teaching techniques workshop that includes several
references to the engineering education research conducted by Wankat and Oreovicz
[1], as well as Lowman [2]. Table 1 summarizes the various topics covered during
this initial, three-day workshop. Senior faculty conduct the seminars and model
teaching techniques during four different demonstration classes.

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education 32/1

56 M. Bailey et al.

TABLE 1 ISW three-day teaching techniques workshop

Seminar Subject

1 Learning to teach in the civil and mechanical engineering department

2 Principles of effective teaching and learning
3 Teaching assessment
4 An introduction to learning styles
5 Organizing a class
6 Planning the class
7 Communication and presentation skills
8 Questioning techniques
9 Classroom assessment techniques
10 Systematic design of instruction
11 Teaching with technology

The remainder of the ISW experience consists of new instructors teaching sample
lessons from their respective courses. In all, each participant teaches one 30-minute
class and six 55-minute classes over the course of four weeks. All classes are video-
taped for the instructors to view and assess on their own in order to improve teach-
ing techniques. The classes are spread out in order to give the new instructors ample
time to prepare and make improvements.
Senior faculty attend each class in order to ask the sort of questions that could be
expected from undergraduate students and to provide immediate oral and written
assessment at the conclusion of the class. The assessment is based on technical
expertise, lesson organization, conduct of the class, and the classroom environment.
Written assessment is recorded on a teaching assessment worksheet (included as
Appendix 1). During the final week of the ISW, new instructors participate in the
assessment of peer classes. Instructor assessment continues throughout the semes-
ter through classroom visits from senior faculty and peers. Generally, written assess-
ments are maintained in each instructor’s teacher portfolio, which is a notebook that
houses documents to assist in on-going self-assessment. For a more detailed descrip-
tion of the ISW experience, refer to Hanus and Evans [3].

Course background
The goal of EM301 is to provide students 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 expe-
rience 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: preliminary topics, methods and tools of analysis,
and relevant applications. Table 2 gives a complete summary of topic coverage.

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education 32/1

USMA thermodynamics course 57

TABLE 2 Summary of topics explored in EM301

Subject Lessons

Introduction to thermodynamic concepts and nomenclature 2

Steam tables 2
Ideal gas equation of state and energy transfer concepts 2
First law of thermodynamics 6
Second law of thermodynamics 3
Thermodynamic devices and isentropic efficiencies 1
Steam vapor power cycles 5
Internal combustion engines 5
Automotive emissions 1
Gas turbine engines 4
Vapor-compression refrigeration cycles 2
Total air conditioning applications (psychrometrics) 2
Review classes 3
Exams 2
Total 40

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 students learn how it is used to fix
states and properties. Referring to Table 2, 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 first and second laws of thermodynamics and students apply
these laws to steady-flow closed and open systems. Prior to the introduction of
detailed applications, the students learn the methods involved in determining
isentropic 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. Students 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.
Students then complete a block of instruction on internal combustion engines,
including 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.
Because EM301 is one semester long, there are certain topics that are not included
owing to time limitations. Some of the more notable omissions include exergy

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education 32/1

58 M. Bailey et al.

analyses, transient systems, thermodynamic property relations, chemical reactions,

chemical and phase equilibrium, and thermodynamics of high-speed gas flow. An
advanced thermodynamics course, ME472, energy conversion systems, provides
instruction in several of these and many other topical areas [4]. Enrollment in this
course is generally limited to senior year ME majors.
The course is supported by an internal website with links to the course syllabus,
administration information, lesson objectives, reading assignments, practice prob-
lems, technical writing standards, external thermodynamic-related links, and so on.
As the semester progresses, scanned solutions for all in-class sample problems and
practice problems are linked to the website. Each instructor also maintains a sepa-
rate section of the website to post solutions for individual homework and student
grades. Course-end student assessment has shown that the website is an excellent
tool for providing students with valuable course information.

Course administration
The greatest challenge in a course of this size is maintaining equity between sec-
tions. In general, five to seven instructors per semester teach the course. An impor-
tant objective is to ensure that each student is taught the same lesson objectives while
allowing instructors to use their own teaching style. A course director is assigned to
oversee all administrative aspects of the course. Besides teaching, the course direc-
tor maintains equity between sections and assembles a detailed course assessment
package once each year. The course assessment process begins each year with a
course proposal, which is presented at the end of the spring semester [5].
During the course proposal process, the course director conducts a review of the
entire course, using course-end feedback from students and instructors. An evalua-
tion is conducted to ensure that the thermodynamics course is meeting the overall
mechanical engineering division objectives. EM301 course objectives are as follows:

• Apply the conservation of mass, conservation of energy, and the second law of
thermodynamics to open and closed systems.
• Apply thermodynamic properties and equations of state for an ideal gas, steam,
and refrigerants.
• Analyze the common ideal power generation cycles, including the Rankine, Otto,
Diesel and Brayton, and their respective actual cycles.
• Analyze the ideal and actual vapor compression refrigeration cycle.
• Analyze an air/water mixture as it applies to total air conditioning.

Throughout the semester, individual lesson objectives are reviewed and modified to
ensure that course objectives are being met. At the end of each semester, students
are asked to rate their ability to accomplish each of the course objectives. This feed-
back is used in the course proposal process to adjust the amount of time allotted to
cover each objective.
During the semester, the course director conducts weekly lesson conferences with
all instructors to coordinate instruction for the next several lessons. Weekly lesson

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education 32/1

USMA thermodynamics course 59

TABLE 3 EM301 graded event summary

Graded event Quantity Points

55-minute exam 2 200 each

30-minute quiz 2 100 each
Labs 4 50 each
Instructor grade 1 200
Design project 1 225
(ABET)
Term-end exam 1 475
Total 1700

conferences also serve as an effective means of enhancing student learning through

open discussions by the diverse thermodynamics teaching faculty. The primary tool
used to facilitate discussion during the lesson conference is board notes. These also
serve as an adequate 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 will write on
each blackboard section during the class. Sample board notes provided by the course
director serve as a guide for each instructor in preparing their own board notes. The
notes are commonly modified to meet an individual instructor’s teaching style.
Each week, at the lesson conference, the course director reviews the sample board
notes for the following week’s lessons. This is an open discussion where ideas are
exchanged between instructors for teaching each lesson objective. 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 stu-
dents being evaluated equally. All instructors give the same quizzes, mid-term and
final examinations, and graded laboratory reports. The use of common examinations
allows each faculty member to assess how 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 any necessary course adjustment. Table 3 lists
the graded events included in EM301 with associated event weights.
Grading is also uniform between sections. The course director prepares solutions
and cut scales for each question on an examination. The cut scales assign specific
point deductions for each component of a solution. Individual instructors grade
quizzes using the same cut scale. For the 55-minute and final examinations, one
instructor is assigned to grade a specific page or problem for all students taking the
course. Each instructor is given an opportunity to influence the focus of a particu-
lar examination question. Typically, these questions are written by several instruc-
tors and submitted to the course director to assemble into the final product. Several
instructors then take the timed examination to ensure that it is of appropriate length

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education 32/1

60 M. Bailey et al.

and difficulty. A criterion-based grading system is used and therefore it is important

that the examination challenges the students while providing an opportunity for
excellent students to achieve an A.

Classroom experience
The methodology employed to teach thermodynamics at the USMA is similar to that
of many other institutions. Before coming to class, students read an assigned section
of their textbook pertaining to the lesson objectives. The students then attend the
lesson, which typically includes at least one sample problem and is heavily laden
with discussions between students and the instructor. Students may be given home-
work to complete before the next lesson. Additional practice problems associated
with every lesson are available on the web.
Throughout the semester, instructors invoke student interest in thermodynamics
using unique training aids that demonstrate a broad range of topics. During the first
several lessons of the semester, brief demonstrations are incorporated into each
lesson to make new material more comprehensible. For example, during lesson 2,
titled ‘The language of thermodynamics’, a simple scale experiment demonstrates
quasi-equilibrium, a pressure box is used to demonstrate the difference between
absolute, gage, and vacuum pressures, and a pressure gage is opened to examine
how a Bourdon tube works. In lesson 3, ‘Properties of pure substances and the vapor
dome for water’, a vacuum chamber illustrates water’s temperature–pressure depen-
dence. This leads to a discussion of cooking at high altitudes and using a pressure
cooker. In lesson 10, ‘First law for a cycle and introductory concepts of the second
law’, the heat pump/refrigeration/air conditioning cycle is drawn on the board and
magnetized pictures are moved around the thermal reservoirs to illustrate the
differences and similarities between cycles.
During the latter half of the semester, larger and more complex training aids are
incorporated into most lessons. A Jeep in-line six-cylinder engine cutaway, shown
in Fig. 1, is used often during the reciprocating engine lesson block, along with
several smaller models of spark-ignition, compression-ignition, and two-stroke
engines. During the gas turbine section of the course, T-53 and T-700 turbo-shaft
engine cutaways from UH-1 Huey and UH-60 Blackhawk helicopters, respectively,
are used to demonstrate engine operation and layout. The T-700 cutaway is shown
in Fig. 2. These turbo-shaft engines have been equipped to run electrically, at very
low r.p.m., so that the students can see how the compressor and turbine stages
work. During the lessons covering the vapor-compression refrigeration cycle, a
Brodhead–Garrett trainer is utilized to better explain the cycle’s operation and com-
ponents. Other notable training aids include an AGT-1500 turbo-shaft engine from
the M-1 Abrams main battle tank, shown in Fig. 3, a cutaway of a turbojet engine,
and various cutaways of air conditioners and refrigerators.
Because of the pace of the course and the nature of the material presented, the
thermodynamics team has created various learning aids for the students to use
throughout the semester. These learning aids consist of flow sheet equation cards.
The first card distributed to each student is the steam card and a copy is included as

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education 32/1

USMA thermodynamics course 61

Fig. 1 Cutaway of a Jeep in-line six-cylinder engine.

Fig. 2 T-700 gas turbine engine from a UH-60 Blackhawk helicopter.

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education 32/1

62 M. Bailey et al.

Fig. 3 AGT-1500 turbo-shaft-engine from the M-1 Abrams main battle tank.

Appendix 2. The steam card presents processes for fixing a state point and for deter-
mining a state point’s region in relation to the vapor dome. Flowcharts for the first
and second laws of thermodynamics are also given to each student in subsequent
lessons and are included here as Appendices 3 and 4, respectively. These flowcharts
first ask whether the system is closed or open and then list the respective first law
and second law relations for each. Then, the medium is determined, and if it is steam,
the flowchart refers the student to procedures found on the steam card. If the medium
is an ideal gas, the first or second law equations for either variable or constant
specific heats are listed.

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education 32/1

USMA thermodynamics course 63

Laboratory experience
Dedicated EM301 laboratory facilities house full-scale steam and gas turbines as
well as spark ignition, compression ignition and cooperative fuels research engines.
Four 2-hour laboratory sessions provide students with opportunities to gain insight
into practical applications of the theory discussed in the classroom. Each laboratory
session is broken into three distinct components, including the pre-laboratory assign-
ment, the actual laboratory, and final written report that is due by the end of the 2-
hour laboratory period. Students first complete a pre-laboratory assignment, which
is essentially a homework assignment given to the students a lesson before the lab-
oratory period. This assignment is worth 30% of the total laboratory score and is
collected at the beginning of the laboratory period. The assignment includes reading
to introduce pertinent laboratory equipment and testing/measurement devices. This
is followed by comprehensive problem(s) concerning a specific power cycle and
open-ended questions in which the students are asked to design different methods
of instrumentation plans, given analysis requirements. Instrumentation and experi-
mentation are introduced in EM301 through a reading assignment [6] and classroom
discussion. Through this instruction, students can better understand uncertainty
analysis and the purpose and operation of instruments such as dynamometers,
thermometers, thermocouples, tachometers, flow meters, and pressure gages.
Students conduct the actual laboratory exercises in dedicated laboratory facilities
located in classroom buildings at West Point. The faculty initiates each laboratory
session with an introduction to the relevant equipment. This interactive orientation
also allows students to identify different components of the engine, gages, and
describe how these gages are used in cycle analysis. The ensuing instruction demon-
strates to the students how to properly read the instrumentation in order to deter-
mine power output, efficiency, and other relevant parameters. Finally, the students
are broken into three- or four-person teams and given the laboratory datasheet and
final report handout. Each team collects data from the instrumented equipment and
then analyzes it in order to answer a series of questions based on the conservation
of mass and energy. Infrequently during past semesters, some laboratory facilities
have been unavailable owing to building renovations and virtual laboratory exer-
cises have been created using videotapes and pre-recorded datasets.
The four laboratories are as follows and each will be discussed in detail within
the next several paragraphs:

• steam turbine laboratory;

• spark-ignition/compression-ignition comparison laboratory;
• cooperative fuels research (CFR) laboratory;
• gas turbine laboratory.

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 laboratory gives students an opportunity to collect and analyze oper-
ating data from two steam-powered turbines. The laboratory objectives include
determining steam power cycle performance characteristics, examining methods for

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education 32/1

64 M. Bailey et al.

Fig. 4 The Westinghouse steam turbine.

Fig. 5 The carling steam turbine.

improving cycle performance, and gaining practical experience in laboratory

analyses.
The steam for the laboratory is provided from the USMA power plant, which is
located nearby. Each steam turbine set-up is slightly different in configuration. In
the Westinghouse turbine set-up (see Fig. 4), the steam travels through a superheater
before expanding across a turbine that drives a generator powering several light
bulbs. In the Carling turbine set-up (see Fig. 5), the steam from the power plant
directly drives a turbine attached to a dynamometer. A first law analysis is used to

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education 32/1

USMA thermodynamics course 65

Fig. 6 Single-cylinder spark-ignition engines within the cooperative fuel research

laboratory.

determine the power output and heat transfer rate from the Westinghouse turbine.
The Carling turbine is studied to determine isentropic efficiency and entropy gen-
eration. An uncertainty analysis is also performed on several of the results using the
Kline–McClintock method [7].
During the block of lessons on the Otto and Diesel cycles, two different labora-
tories are conducted. The Hercules spark-ignition (SI) engine/compression-ignition
(CI) engine comparison laboratory offers students an opportunity to conduct
variable-speed tests on SI and CI engines in order to compare performance charac-
teristics and analyze the effects of air/fuel ratio. Students obtain torque and fuel flow
rate readings from both CI and SI engines with identical displacements over a range
of engine speeds. These data are used to generate graphs that compare each engine’s
relative power output and efficiency. The SI engine emissions are also analyzed by
collecting data on the levels of carbon monoxide and hydrocarbon emissions present
in the exhaust gas for different air/fuel ratios. Emission graphs are produced to deter-
mine optimal operating conditions. Students are also asked to explore other methods
by which emissions may be reduced.
The cooperative fuel research (CFR) equipment permits students to investigate
how spark timing angle, compression ratio and fuel octane level affect engine per-
formance. This on-site laboratory facility includes four single-cylinder SI engine set-
ups, as shown in Fig. 6. The objectives for the CFR laboratory are to conduct tests
on an SI engine to determine the effects of spark timing angle, compression ratio,
and fuel octane rating on engine performance. In addition, the students describe the
causes of engine knock and list possible remedies. Two fuels are tested, with varying

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education 32/1

66 M. Bailey et al.

Fig. 7 Blackhawk helicopter’s auxiliary power unit.

levels of octane (87 and 110). The engines are designed to allow easy manipulation
of the compression ratios. Students adjust the ratio from 6 to 8.5 during the labora-
tory exercise. Additionally, the students advance the spark-timing angles from 5° to
30° before top dead center. During the experiment, students measure engine horse-
power and engine knock under the various operating conditions. The students use
these data to produce a plot that depicts the effect of these variables on engine
performance.
The gas turbine laboratory is designed to afford students the opportunity to study
the performance of a T-62T-40-1 Blackhawk helicopter’s auxiliary power unit
(APU), as shown in Fig. 7. The Blackhawk is the United States Army’s primary
utility helicopter and is quite familiar to most army personnel and to the students
taking the class. The APU is a ‘simple cycle’ turbo-shaft engine, meaning that it has
no intercooler, no regenerator, and no split-shaft turbine. It is a constant-speed
engine, with only a single high-speed turbine compressor shaft. The objective is to
determine the performance characteristics of a gas turbine engine while varying
engine load.
A remote laboratory facility housing the two operational APUs 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, students are asked how to better instrument the laboratory to
obtain reliable data. This reinforces students’ ability to design and execute an
experiment.

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 co-generation plant
designed to provide a limited amount of electrical power to the main campus area

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education 32/1

USMA thermodynamics course 67

while providing process heat for student dining facilities, showers, and building heat.
The plant also includes an absorption refrigeration system for air conditioning of a
large academic building. This tour is an ideal opportunity to expose the students to
the sheer size of steam power plant components and to reinforce key concepts taught
in the classroom.

ABET design project

Thermodynamics at the USMA is designated as either EM301 or EM301A. Most
students pursuing an ABET-accredited engineering degree, such as mechanical, envi-
ronmental, or civil engineering, enroll in the EM301A version of the course. These
engineering students attend the same classes and laboratories as the students enrolled
in EM301; however, these students also complete a group design project, as defined
by ABET. The course credit for EM301 is 3, with an additional half-credit for those
enrolling in EM301A.
The USMA power plant is used as the foundation for the design project. The basic
scenario is that the power plant has been destroyed by a fire and the academy is cur-
rently buying electricity from the local utility company. The students, working in
design teams of three or four individuals, are asked to design a new power plant.
The teams 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 require-
ment with the exhaust gases used in a regenerative steam power cycle.
Over most of the semester, the teams work together on the design. Each team is
required to complete three in-progress reviews (IPRs) throughout the semester to
document progress to date and receive feedback from the professor. At the end of
the semester, each student design team is required to conduct a final presentation
and submit a final report. Appendix 5 gives the details of each requirement associ-
ated with this project. During the first IPR, students orally present schematics, with
all state points labeled, for two possible design options. The instructors evaluate the
students’ designs and provide feedback on design enhancements and necessary
corrections.
During the second IPR, the teams brief their instructor on the improvements and
corrections made since the first IPR. Each team also presents the results of several
thermodynamic analyses, including the determination of utilization factors as dis-
cussed in Appendix 5.
The IPR third requires the evaluation of several cost-related topics. The project
concludes with a final written submission, written in accordance with the depart-
ment’s Standards for Technical Reports [8], and an oral presentation. Both are crit-
ical in developing the cadet’s communication abilities. The ABET design project
was designed so that each student takes approximately 20 hours to complete the
project.

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education 32/1

68 M. Bailey et al.

References
[1] P. C. Wankat and P. S. Oreovicz, Teaching Engineering (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1993).
[2] J. Lowman, Mastering the Techniques of Teaching (Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, 1995).
[3] J. P. Hanus and M. D. Evans, ‘In pursuit of teaching excellence in the classroom – instructor summer
workshop at West Point’, Proceedings, American Society for Engineering Education Annual Con-
ference & Exposition, American Society for Engineering Education (Albuquerque, NM, 24–27 June
2001).
[4] M. Bailey and O. Arnas, ‘The evolution of an energy conversion course at the United States
Military Academy’, Proceedings, American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference
& Exposition (Montreal, Canada, 16–20 June 2002).
[5] R. Floersheim and M. Bailey, ‘Course assessment: a tool for integrated curriculum management’,
Proceedings, American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition,
American Society for Engineering Education (Albuquerque, NM, 24–27 June 2001).
[6] E. O. Doebelin, Engineering Experimentation: Planning, Execution, Reporting (McGraw-Hill, New
York, 1995).
[7] J. P. Holman, Experimental Methods for Engineers, 2nd edn (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1966),
pp 37–39.
[8] USMA Department of Civil and Mechanical Engineering, Standards for Technical Reports (United
States Military Academy, West Point, NY, 1991).

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education 32/1

USMA thermodynamics course 69

Appendix 1. ISW teaching assessment worksheet

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education 32/1

70 M. Bailey et al.

Appendix 1. ISW teaching assessment worksheet (continued)

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education 32/1

USMA thermodynamics course 71

Appendix 2. Steam card

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education 32/1

72 M. Bailey et al.

Appendix 2. Steam card (continued)

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education 32/1

USMA thermodynamics course 73

Appendix 3. First law flowchart

Appendix 4. Second law flowchart

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education 32/1

74 M. Bailey et al.

Appendix 5. The ABET design requirements

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education 32/1

USMA thermodynamics course 75

Appendix 5. The ABET design requirements (continued)

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education 32/1

76 M. Bailey et al.

Appendix 5. The ABET design requirements (continued)

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education 32/1

USMA thermodynamics course 77

Appendix 5. The ABET design requirements (continued)

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Education 32/1