In this paper, a teaching strategy which effectively enhances the students’ ability to solve practical problems is developed, and thus it can provide a potential tool for engineering mechanics teaching. Through organically integrating optimization theory into mechanics modeling, students’ skill of structural optimization modeling is improved, which help them understand basic concepts involved in mechanics and mathematics and master a general method for practical problem solving. The corresponding course unit is designed to instruct students to perform structural optimization modeling for a series of similar but non-identical mechanics problems, which can motivate them to actively explore the essential relationship between mechanics equations and mathematical models. The effectiveness of the proposed strategy is demonstrated by the “six principles” for designing thought-revealing activities and the feedback from all participants in the course.
HaOFangN.Spatial ability in learning engineering mechanics: critical review. J Prof Issues Eng Educ Pract2016;
142.
3.
ArnoldVI.Mathematical methods of classical mechanics. Adv Math1983;
49: 106–106.
4.
CaballeroMDKohlmyerMASchatzMF.Implementing and assessing computational modeling in introductory mechanics.Phys Rev Phys Educ Res2011;
8: 15.
5.
MichelsenC.Mathematical modeling is also physics–interdisciplinary teaching between mathematics and physics in Danish upper secondary education. Phys Educ2015;
50: 489–494.
6.
MathioudakisKPolitisEStamatisA.A computer model as an educational tool for gas turbine performance. Int J Mech Eng Educ1999;
27: 113–125.
7.
SilvaCWD.Linear-graph modeling paradigms for mechatronic systems. Int J Mech Eng Educ2012;
40: 305–328.
8.
DhattGLefranÃETouzotG.Finite element method.
New York:
John Wiley & Sons, 2012.
9.
ShakerinSJensenDD.Enhancement of mechanics education by means of photoelasticity and finite element method. Int J Mech Eng Educ2001;
29: 307–320.
10.
DabneyJBGhorbelFH.Enhancing an advanced engineering mechanics course using MATLAB and Simulink. Int J Eng Educ2005;
21: 885–895.
11.
AsanoTMinataOItoH, et al.Teaching methodology of structural mechanics by using computer simulation and experimental models in the classroom. J JSEE2009;
49.
12.
LeeJYAhnSY.Finite element implementation for computer‐aided education of structural mechanics: frame analysis. Comput Appl Eng Educ2014;
22: 387–409.
13.
ZuoWBaiJChengF.EFESTS: educational finite element software for truss structure, part I: preprocess. Int J Mech Eng Educ2014;
42: 298–306.
14.
ZuoWLiXGuoG.EFESTS: educational finite element software for truss structure, part II: linear static analysis. Int J Mech Eng Educ2014;
42: 307–319.
15.
ZuoWHuangKChengF.EFESTS: educational finite element software for truss structure, part III: geometrically nonlinear static analysis. Int J Mech Eng Educ2017;
45: 154–169.
16.
LiTJWangJ.Dynamic simulation of mechanism in theory mechanics teaching. Eurasia J Math Sci Tech Ed2017;
13: 5997–6004.
17.
LarkinJMcdermottJSimonDP, et al.
Expert and novice performance in solving physics problems.Science1980;
208: 1335–1342.
18.
GilatTAmitM.Exploring young students creativity: the effect of model eliciting activities. PNA2014;
8: 51–59.
19.
KertilMGurelC.Mathematical modeling: a bridge to STEM education. Int J Educ Math Sci Technol2016;
4: 44–55.
20.
LeshRKellyA.Multitiered teaching experiments. New Jersey, United States:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2000.
21.
KirschU.Structural optimization: fundamentals and applications. Berlin, Germany:
Springer-Verlag, 1993.
22.
PragerW.Introduction to structural optimization.
The Netherlands:
Springer, 2008.
23.
ZhuHWangPFanZ.Evolutionary design optimization of MEMS: a brief review. In: IEEE international conference on industrial technology. IEEE, 2010, pp.1683–1687.
24.
YaoWChenXLuoW, et al.
Review of uncertainty-based multidisciplinary design optimization methods for aerospace vehicles]. Prog Aerosp Sci2011;
47: 450–479.
25.
DuanYDanMI.A review of recent developments in electrical machine design optimization methods with a permanent-magnet synchronous motor benchmark study. IEEE Trans Ind Applicat2013;
49: 1268–1275.
26.
LiangJMourelatosZPTuJ.A single-loop method for reliability-based design optimisation. Int J Prod Dev2004;
5: 76–92.
27.
VenkataramanP.Applied optimization with MATLAB programming.
Wiley-Interscience, 2009.
28.
ChiMTHFeltovichPJGlaserR.Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cogn Sci1981;
5: 121–152.
29.
Diefes-DuxHAMooreTZawojewskiJet al.
A framework for posing open-ended engineering problems: model-eliciting activities. In: 34th Annual Frontiers in Education, 2004, Savannah, GA, 20–23 October 2004, pp. F1A-3. IEEE.
30.
VenkayyaVB.Structural optimization: a review and some recommendations. Int J Numer Meth Eng1978;
13: 203–228.
31.
ZuoWZhaoCZhouLet al.
Comparison of gradient and nongradient algorithms in the structural optimization course. Int J Mech Eng Educ. 2019; 47: 275–290.
32.
WenMC.Construction of monitoring teaching quality in regular teaching university. J Hunan City Univ2008.
