Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-5wvtr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-22T05:19:27.409Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

PROJECT-BASED LEARNING IN ENGINEERING EDUCATION – DEVELOPING DIGITAL TWINS IN A CASE STUDY

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 June 2023

Lisa Hagedorn ,
Theresa Riedelsheimer  and
Rainer Stark
Lisa Hagedorn*
Affiliation:
Technische Universität Berlin;
Theresa Riedelsheimer
Affiliation:
Fraunhofer IPK
Rainer Stark
Affiliation:
Technische Universität Berlin;
*
Hagedorn, Lisa, Technische Universität Berlin, Germany, lisa.hagedorn@tu-berlin.de

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The current engineering environment demands for an increasing level of interdisciplinarity, innovation, creativity and cross-domain thinking as well as the consideration of sustainability aspects. New concepts, such as Digital Twins and complex product systems lead to the need for integrated product development approaches and new methods that put the user perspective in focus. This also needs to be an integral part in today's teaching concepts of the next generation of engineers.

At the Department of Industrial Information Technology of the Technical University of Berlin, a case study was conducted by applying a concept of project-based learning in the engineering domain to address these challenges. In this paper, the case study as well as the method and its validation are presented. Students from different engineering disciplines had the task of developing virtual and physical prototypes for a sustainable, complex product system with a digital twin and respective sustainable business models. Within a structured survey, the teaching concept and the applied method were validated and lessons learned as well as further improvement measures are derived.

Keywords

EducationIntegrated product developmentPBLDigital TwinsSustainability
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society , Volume 3: ICED23 , July 2023 , pp. 2975 - 2984
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press

References

Alves, A. C., Moreira, F., Leão, C. P. and Carvalho, M. A. (2017), Sustainability and circular economy through PBL: Engineering students’ perceptions, in Vilarinho, C., Castro, F., and de Lurdes Lopes, M. (eds.), WASTES – Solutions, Treatments and Opportunities II: Selected Papers from the 4th Edition of the International Conference on Wastes: Solutions, Treatments and Opportunities, Porto, Portugal, 25–26 September 2017, CRC Press, Chapter 64. https://dx.doi.org/10.1201/9781315206172-65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anazifa, R. D. D., 2017. Project - Based Learning and Problem - Based Learning: Are They Effective to Improve Student's Thinking Skills?. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, pp. 346–355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bauters, M., Holvikivi, J. and Vesikivi, P. (2020), An Overview of the Situation of Project-Based Learning in Engineering Education, Proceedings of the 48th Annual Conference of the Society for Engineering Education (SEFI’20), Enschede, The Netherlands, 20–24 September 2020, pp. 52–60. https://www.sefi.be/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Proceedings-DEF-nov-2020-kleiner.pdf (accessed 29.4.2021)Google Scholar
Boschert, S. and Rosen, R. (2016), Digital Twin—The Simulation Aspect, In Mechatronic Futures: Challenges and Solutions for Mechatronic Systems and their Designers, Cham, s.l.: Springer International Publishing, pp. 59–74.Google Scholar
Brundiers, K. and Wiek, A. (2013), Do We Teach What We Preach? An International Comparison of Problem- and Project-Based Learning Courses in Sustainability, Sustainability, Vol. 5, No. 4, pp. 1725–1746. https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su5041725Google Scholar
Chen, J., Kolmos, A. and Du, X. (2020), Forms of implementation and challenges of PBL in engineering education: A review of literature, European Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 46, No. 1, pp. 1–26. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2020.1718615Google Scholar
DIN EN ISO 14040:2006 (2009): Umweltmanagement - Ökobilanz - Grundsätze und Rahmenbedingungen.Google Scholar
Du, X., Ebead, U., Sabah, S., Ma, J. and Naji, K. (2019), Engineering Students’ Approaches to Learning and Views on Collaboration: How do both Evolve in a PBL Environment and What are their Contributing and Constraining Factors?, Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, Vol. 15, No. 11, em1774. https://dx.doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/106197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edström, K. and Kolmos, A. (2014), PBL and CDIO: Complementary models for engineering education development, European Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 39, No. 5, pp. 539–555. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2014.895703CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frank, M., Lavy, I. & Elata, D., 2003. Implementing the Project-Based Learning Approachin an Academic Engineering Course. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 13, p. 73–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guo, P., Saab, N., Post, L. S. & Admiraal, W., 2020. A review of project-based learning in higher education: Student outcomes and measures. s.l., s.nCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kolmos, A. (2017), PBL Curriculum Strategies. From Course Based PBL to a Systemic PBL Approach, in Guerra, A., Ulseth, R. and Kolmos, A.(eds.) PBL in Engineering Education, SensePublishers, Rotterdam, pp. 1–12.Google Scholar
Krajcik, J. & Shin, N., 2014. Project-based learning. s.l., s.n., pp. 275–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
López-Fernández, D., Ezquerro, J. M., Rodríguez, J., Porter, J., and Lapuerta, V. 2019, Motivational impact of active learning methods in aerospace engineering students, Acta Astronautica, Vol. 165, pp. 344–354. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.actaastro.2019.09.026CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, J. E. and Rogers, L. (2020), Staff perceptions of implementing project-based learning in engineering education, European Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 45, No. 3, pp. 349–362. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2019.1641471CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mörike, F. Hagedorn, L. Wang, W.M. Stark, R. Feufel, M.A. (2021), Knowledge Dynamics in Project-Based Learning: An Ethnographic Case Study of Multi-Disciplinary Engineering Graduate Student Teams (SEFI'21) Berlin, 49th Annual ConferenceGoogle Scholar
Riedelsheimer, T.; Lünnemann, P.; Wehking, S.; Dorfhuber, L. (2020): Digital Twin Readiness Assessment. urn:nbn:de:0011-n-5995604.Google Scholar
Riedelsheimer, T., Gogineni, S., & Stark, R. (2021). Methodology to develop Digital Twins for energy efficient customizable IoT-Products. Procedia CIRP, 98, 258–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Servant-Miklos, V., Holgaard, J. E. and Kolmos, A. (2020), A “PBL effect”? A longitudinal qualitative study of sustainability awareness and interest in PBL engineering students, in Guerra, A., Kolmos, A., Winther, M. and Chen, J. (eds.), Educate for the future: PBL, Sustainability and Digitalisation 2020, Aalborg Universitetsforlag, pp. 45–55.Google Scholar
Shin, M.-H., 2018. Effects of Project-based Learning on Students’. s.l., s.n., pp. 95–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stark, R. and Damerau, T. (2019), Digital Twin, In CIRP Encyclopedia of Production Engineering Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
Stark, R., Fresemann, C. and Lindow, K. (2019), Development and operation of digital twins for technical systems and services, CIRP Annals Manufacturing Technology, vol. 2019.Google Scholar
Strobel, J. and Barneveld, A. van. (2009), When is PBL More Effective? A Meta-synthesis of Meta-analyses Comparing PBL to Conventional Classrooms. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, Vol. 3, No 6, pp. 44–58. https://dx.doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1046Google Scholar
VDI-Richtlinie 2206: 2004 Entwicklung mechatronischer und cyber-physischer Systeme, Verein deutscher Ingenieure, Düsseldorf, 2021.Google Scholar
VDI-Richtlinie 2221: Methodik zum Entwickeln und Konstruieren technischer Systeme und Produkte, Verein deutscher Ingenieure, Düsseldorf, 2019.Google Scholar
Vesikivi, P., Lakkala, M., Holvikivi, J. and Muukkonen, H. (2019), Team teaching implementation in engineering education: Teacher perceptions and experiences. European Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 44, No. 4, pp. 519–534. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2018.1446910CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, W.M., Mörike, F., Hergesell, J., Baur, N., Feufel, M., Stark, R. (2019), Approaching Knowledge Dynamics Across the Product Development Process with Methods of Social Research, Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED19), Delft, The Netherlands, 5–8 August 2019. https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/dsi.2019.256CrossRefGoogle Scholar