Engineering Accreditation Commission
Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology
111 Market Place, Suite 1050
Baltimore, MD 21202-4012
American Institute of Chemical Engineers
Attn: Manager of Education Services
3 Park Avenue
New York, NY 10016-5991
SELF- STUDY REPORT FOR
CHEMICAL AND MOLECULAR ENGINEERING PROGRAM
Main Body and Appendix I (Program Data)
For the
Chemical & Molecular Engineering BE Program
of the
Materials Science and Engineering Department
Submitted by
Stony Brook University
June 2007
to the
Engineering Accreditation Commission
and the
American Institute of Chemical Engineers
1
Table of Contents
A. Background Information …………………………... 7
A1. Degree Titles ……………………………………………… 8
1.1 The Bachelors of Engineering (B.E.) degree in
Chemical and Molecular Engineering (CME)…………….. 8
1.2 Minors ………………………………………………. 8
1.2.1 Special Degree Options …………………... 9
1.3 Course credit distribution …………………………… 9
A2. Program Modes …………………………………………… 10
A3. Actions to Correct Previous Shortcomings ……………….. 10
A4. Contact Information ………………………………………. 10
4.1 Structure……………………………………………... 10
4.2 Undergraduate Program Committee (UPC) ……….… 12
4.3 Data Collection and Analysis Committee DCAC) ….. 13
4.4 Senior Thesis Committee (STC)……………………… 14
4.5 Course Coordinating Committee (CCC)……………….. 14
B. Accreditation Summary …………………………….. 16
B1. Students …………………………………………………… 16
1.1 Student Admission and Evaluation………………….. 16
1.2 Undergraduate Colleges……………………………… 17
1.3 Additional Requirements Specific to CME………….. 17
1.3.1 CME Freshman Admission Policy ………….. 17
1.3.2 Acceptance in the Major in CME …………… 18
1.3.3 Continuation in the CME Major …………….. 18
1.4 Student Advising and Monitoring……………………. 18
1.4.1 The Fundamentals Exam (FE) ………………. 19
1.5 Graduation Clearance………………………………… 20
1.6 Transfer Credit Validation……………………………. 22
B2. Program Educational Objectives (PEOs’) ………………… 24
2.1 Mission Statements…………………………………… 24
2.2 Constituencies………………………………………… 24
2.3 PEOs’ for CME……………………………………….. 25
2.3.1 Relationship of the PEO to the mission of
Stony Brook University …………………………….. 28
2.3.2 Relationship of the PEO to the mission of CEAS .. 28.
B3. Program Outcomes and Assessment ………………………. 29
3.1 Program Outcomes…………………………………… 29
3.2 The relationship between the CME curriculum
and the program outcomes………………………… 31
3.3 Summary of outcome ratings………………………….. 57
3.4 Relation of Program Outcomes to Educational
Objectives…………………………………………. 58
2
B4. Assessment and Evaluation of the Program ………………… 62
4.1 Loop 1 Continuous Performance Evaluation………….. 63
4.1.1 Measurable Performance Criteria ………………. 63
4.1.2 Definition of the Measurement Tools
and Grading Rubric ……………………………… 64
4.1.3 Tools for determining course content ……………. 64
4.1.4 Tools for Measuring Student Satisfaction ……….. 64
4.1.5 Advising …………………………………………. 69
4.1.6 Student Performance ……………………………... 73
4.1.7 Summary of the Criteria and the Tools
and an example of the process …………………… 77
4.2 Analysis, Assessment, and Evaluation………………… 77
4.2.1 Change engendered from UPC Meeting ………… 78
4.3 The Objectives Feedback Loop………………………. 79
4.3.1 The Alumni Survey …………………………… 79
4.3.2 The External Advisory Board (EAB) ………... 84
4.3.3. Employer Survey ……………………………… 86
B5. Professional Component ………………………………….... 90
5.1 Mathematics and Natural Sciences…………………… 91
5.2 General Education: The Diversified Education
Curriculum………………………………………… 91
5.2.1 The Diversified Education Curriculum (D.E.C.) .. 91
5.2.2 Disciplinary Diversity …………………………….. 94
5.2.3 Expanding Perspectives and Cultural Awareness .. 95
5.3 Engineering Topics……………………………………. 95
5.3.1 Summary of the curriculum …………………... 96
5.4 Engineering Practice…………………………………… 98
5.5 Incorporating Design Content throughout the
Curriculum………………………………………… 106
5.6 Incorporating Engineering Standards and Realistic
Constraints………………………………………… 108
5.7 Incorporating Communication Skills………………….. 110
5.8 Incorporating Ethics…………………………………… 111
5.9 Participation in Engineering Societies………………… 113
5.10 Fundamentals of Engineering Exam…………………. 113
B6. Faculty …………………………………………………….... 114
6.1 Size of Faculty………………………………………… 114
6.2 Faculty Interaction with Students……………………… 114
6.3 Faculty Interaction with Industry……………………… 115
6.3.1 Individual Faculty Interaction ………………… 115
6.3.2 External Advisory Board Members from Industry.. 117
6.3.3 Strategic Partnership for Industrial
3
Resurgence (SPIR) ……………………………... 117
6.4 Competence of Faculty………………………………… 118
6.4.1. Research Component …………………………. 118
6.4.2. Research Funding ……………………………... 121
B7. Facilities ……………………………………………………... 122
7.1 Classrooms……………………………………………… 122
7.2 Libraries………………………………………………… 122
7.3 Computing Facilities……………………………………. 122
7.4 Laboratories…………………………………………….. 123
7.5 Equipment and instrumentation installed in
Laboratory…………………………………………… 128
7.6 Critical Needs…………………………………………… 132
7.7 Continuous Update and Development of Instructional
Laboratories…………………………………………… 132
7.8 Provisions for maintaining and servicing
laboratory equipment………………………………… 132
B8. Institutional Support and Financial Resources …………….... 134
8.1 Institutional Support, Financial Resources, and
Leadership…………………………………………… 134
8.2 Budget Process…………………………………………… 135
B9. Program Criteria …………………………………………… 135
B10. General Advanced-Level Program ………………………… 136
List of Tables
Table B1.1 Stony Brook Undergraduate Chemical & Molecular
Engineering Students at a Glance …………………….... 19
Table B1.2 Average GPA values for CEAS graduates for transfer and
non-transfer students ………………………………….... 23
Table B2.1 Summary of PEOs and the associated metrics ……………. 27
Table B2.2 Relationship of PEOs to the University Mission …………. 28
Table B2.3 Relationship of CME PEOs to the Mission of CEAS …….. 28
Table B3.1 Fraction of credit hours within each course allocated to
ABET Criterion 3 Outcomes ……………………………. 33
Table B3.2 Producing Outcome A-K ………………………………….. 36
Table B3.3 Relationship between PEOs and Outcomes ……………….. 59
Table B4.1 College standing versus standing in CME of those
in the program …………………………………………… 67
Table B4.2 Fresh/Soph Student Survey Results for S07 ………………. 68
Table B4.3 Jr/Sr Student Survey Results for S07 ……………………… 71
Table B4.4 Summary of Criteria and Measurement Tools …………….. 77
List of Figures
Figure A4.1 Structure of the CME program and its relationship to
the Department of Materials Science and Engineering ….. 11
4
Figure B3.1 Percent of credit hours in program allocated to preparation
relating to each outcome …………………………………. 31
Figure B3.2 Course outcome relationships to ABET 3a-k ……………… 57
Figure B3.3 Ratings of student performance in ABET objectives 3a-k … 58
Figure B3.4 Effort distribution to achieve program objectives
within the curriculum …………………………………….. 60
Figure B3.5 Outcome Ratings per PEO ………………………………… 60
Figure B3.6 Strategy Ratings per PEO …………………………………. 61
Figure B4.1 Interconnected loop structures for evaluating the
program in Chemical and Molecular Engineering ………… 62
Figure B4.2 Results of student satisfaction survey for each course ……... 66
Figure B4.3 Average grades in each CME course offered ………………. 74
Figure B4.4 AIChE evaluations …………………………………………. 76
Figure B5.1 CME grid …………………………………………………… 90
Figure B5.2 The four-year CME course sequence and the
interrelationship between courses. …………….................. 97
Figure B6.1 CME Research Expenditures ………………………………. 121
APPENDICES
A. Tabular Data for Program
Table I-1. Basic level Curriculum
Table I-2. Course and Section Size Summary
Table I-3. Faculty Workload Summary
Table I-4. Faculty Analysis
Table I-5. Support Expenditures
B. Course Syllabi
Prereqs……………………………………………………… B1
DECs……………………………………………………….. B38
Core courses………………………………………………… B40
Specializations………………………………………………. B86
Minors………………………………………………………. B99
Graduation checklists……………………………………….. B101
C. Course Evaluation Summaries
D. Faculty Curriculum Vitae.
E. Sample Survey Forms.
F. Survey Summaries
Alumni summaries……………………………………………… F1
Jr/Sr summaries………………………………………………… F7
Fresh/Soph summaries…………………………………………. F8
Senior Design summaries……………………………………… F9
G. Minutes
5
Undergraduate Program Committee minutes………………….. G1
CME Club minutes…………………………………………….. G41
EAB minutes…………………………………………………… G55
H. EAB Member Biographies
I. Transcripts
J. CME 310/320 Lab Experiments
6
A. Background Information
The closing of the Farmingdale campus of Polytechnic University left Long Island
without a chemical engineering education program while the number of high tech
pharmaceutical and specialty chemical industries grew significantly during this period in
the same region. This void presented a particularly opportune moment to undertake the
creation of a program in Chemical Engineering at the State University of New York at
Stony Brook. This idea was reinforced by the ABET review panel who visited several
engineering programs in the College of Engineering and Applied Sciences (CEAS) at
Stony Brook University in 1999. The same panel, during exit interviews, recommended
that the college increase the number of traditional program offerings and strive to offer
more comprehensive programs to its students if it were to bolster its national ranking
among engineering schools. The idea culminated in 2001 with an official announcement
for the chemical engineering program that was posted by Stony Brook University and the
appointment of a program planning committee comprised of faculty from the Chemistry
Department, the Department of Materials Science, the Department of Mechanical
Engineering and the Department of Chemical Engineering at Brooklyn Polytechnic. After
the mandatory posting time, and in the absence of any objections, the program planning
committee convened, and a program meeting the ABET 2000 criteria was proposed. In
order to clearly distinguish ourselves from the program at SUNY Buffalo, which focused
on petrochemical and large-scale industrial operations, we chose molecular level
engineering as our emphasis. This choice serves the needs of regional industry which
consists mostly of biomedical, health care and micro-electronics companies while
minimizing competition between sister SUNY institutions. This focus is reflected in the
name chosen for the program as “Chemical and Molecular Engineering.” We chose to
house the program within the Department of Materials Science and Engineering, which
has a similar nanotechnology focus and where potential synergies exist among the faculty
research programs.
The program was formally approved by the State University of New York (SUNY) in
2003. Our first student was an undeclared SBU sophomore and was admitted to the CME
major as a junior in fall 2004. The first class of freshmen admitted from high school
began in fall 2005. We are currently offering the full curriculum, and our first student to
complete the program graduated in spring 2006. He now attends the University of
Delaware graduate program in chemical engineering.
The first group of students admitted as freshmen will graduate in the fall of 2007, and
most have expressed a desire to sit for the PE examination. Consequently we made an
effort to meet our proposed time-line for ABET accreditation both to evaluate the quality
of our program and to give our graduates the opportunity to obtain full careers as
chemical engineering professionals.
7
1. Degree Titles
1.1 The Bachelors of Engineering (B.E.) degree in Chemical and Molecular
Engineering
The program in Chemical and Molecular Engineering has its origins in the Bachelors
of Science degree in Engineering Chemistry offered jointly by the Department of
Materials Science and Engineering and the Department of Chemistry. As a result it was
decided by the CEAS to house the new program within the Department of Materials
Science and Engineering. The program approved by the State University of New York
Board of Regents (www.stonybrook.edu/cme) now offers a B.E. degree in Chemical and
Molecular Engineering with the following specializations:
• Pharmacology
• Materials Science
• Polymer Science
• Tissue Engineering
• Business
• Custom Specialization
A specialization consists of four courses (12 credits) in a chosen discipline at the 300
level or higher.
The first five targeted specializations were created to meet the regional and national
needs that led to the creation of the program, while the customized specialization was
created to allow students to satisfy their personal career interests and build flexibility into
the program for adjusting to emerging disciplines. Current custom specializations
selected by students include: Applied Mathematics, Physics, Chemistry, Environmental
Science, and Homeland Security. Students can also elect to apply to selected departments
for a minor degree in some of these disciplines, using these courses.
1.2 Minors
The foundation courses required by the CME curriculum are common with those required
for degrees in other related disciplines. Consequently students can elect a specific subset
of specialization courses which will satisfy the degree requirement of the following
departments for conferring a minor degree.
• Pharmacology
• Materials Science
• Business
• Custom: Chemistry, Physics
The Department of Chemistry has indicated that the foundation courses for CME already
satisfy the requirements for a minor in chemistry. Students electing further advanced
chemistry courses for their specialization may also qualify for a major in chemistry. The
final decision of conferring additional degrees is left to the respective departments.
8
1.2.1 Special degrees options
Students following the standard CME curriculum may also opt for tracks that allow them
automatic admission in the following professional schools;
(a) BE/MD: Students can apply simultaneously to the CME program and the School of
Medicine from high school. If accepted into the program, they are required to
satisfactorily complete the CME curriculum and obtain a minimum grade of 28 on the
MCAT examination for guaranteed admission to the Stony Brook School of Medicine.
Students on this track are advised to choose pharmacology, tissue engineering, or any
other track that requires a physiology course.
(b) BE/MBA: Students can apply for this program to the Stony Brook Harriman School of
Business Administration at any time before their junior semester. This is a five-year
program where the students earn a BE in chemical engineering and an MBA from the
Stony Brook Harriman School of Business Administration. Students in this program are
advised to choose the business specialization.
1.3 Course credit distribution
The curriculum initially approved by the State of New York Board of Regents was
developed under the ABET 2000 guidelines by the program planning committee. After
accreditation, the program was further reviewed by the newly appointed Undergraduate
Program Committee (UPC), and the CEAS Curriculum and Teaching Policy Committee
(CTPC) which must approve all courses given within the college. CTPC approval ensures
that the curriculum is consistent with the CEAS mission and academic standards, has fair
distribution of course credit hour allocation, and complies with the general university
Diversity Education Curriculum (D.E.C.) requirement. The present version which was
approved by the CEAS CTPC is still being continuously evaluated within feedback loops
described later, and appropriate adjustments are being made.
The present version of the Chemical and Molecular Engineering Program requires a
minimum of 138-credits subdivided as follows;
Chemical Engineering Foundation Courses 56 credits
Chemical Engineering Core 47 credits
Specialization courses 12 credits
D.E.C. requirement (modified for the 23 credits
CEAS)
Total 138 credits
The composite curriculum has the following key features:
• Emphasis on the molecular basis of chemical engineering, computer simulation,
processes modeling, nanoscale operation and design, environmental impact, and
engineering ethics.
• Strong interdisciplinary programs.
• A course sequence that upon graduation, prepares the students to enter industry that
employs chemical engineers, graduate school, or acceptance to professional schools
in medicine, business, or law.
9
• Close relationship with Brookhaven National Laboratory, which houses the Center
for Functional Nanomaterials (CFN) and regional industrial research laboratories
which provide students with internship opportunities and fellowships.
While emphasizing traditional chemical engineering skills, the program teaches students
the molecular basis of chemical phenomena, control, and operations. The program
provides a rigorous laboratory and design component within the context of
interdisciplinary team work and original research. The training in this program stresses
strong education in mathematics, physics, chemistry, materials and computer science in
combination with courses on patent laws, intellectual property, and ethics.
2. Program Modes
The Chemical and Molecular Engineering degree program is a standard day program,
offered within the Department of Materials Science and Engineering, which also offers a
program in Engineering Science which passed accreditation by ABET in 2006. The two
programs are administered by one chair but have separate admission requirements,
faculty, facilities, and budgets.
3. Actions to Correct Previous Shortcomings
This is a new program seeking to obtain accreditation for the first time.
4. Contact Information
4.1 Structure
The chair oversees both programs offered by the Department of Materials Science and
Engineering. The two programs have separate program directors who in turn chair the
two separate undergraduate program committees (UPCs) and report to the department
head. The UPC may appoint additional subcommittees to handle other tasks and report
their findings to the UPC. Three sub-committees have been formed in the CME program:
(i) Data Collection and Analysis Committee, DCAC, which is charged with collecting
and processing of data
(ii) Senior Thesis Committee (STC) which is charged with reviewing student applications
for their senior theses and approving advisors
(iii) Course Coordinator Committee (CCC) which is assigned to review course content as
well as student and instructor performance in each of the three core program categories
10
Figure A4.1 Structure of the CME program and its relationship to the Department
of Materials Science and Engineering
Chair
Materials Science Department
ESG CME
EAB Co-Directors
Program Director
UPC CCC UPC
STC DCAC
Department Chair
Title: Dr. Michael Dudley
Position: Chair, Materials Science Department
Address: Department of Materials Science and Engineering
Stony Brook University
Stony Brook, New York 11794-2275
Phone: 631-632-8500
Fax: 631-632-8052
Email: mdudley@notes.cc.sunysb.edu
Undergraduate Program Co-Director
Title: Dr. Miriam Rafailovich
Position: Undergraduate Program Director, Chemical & Molecular Engineering
Program
Address: Department of Materials Science and Engineering
Stony Brook University
Stony Brook, New York 11794-2275
Phone: 631-632-8498
Fax: 631-632-8052
Email: mrafailovich@notes.cc.sunysb.edu
Undergraduate Program Co-Director
Title: Dr. Devinder Mahajan
Position: Undergraduate Program Co-Director, Chemical & Molecular Engineering
Program
11
Address: Department of Materials Science and Engineering
Stony Brook University
Stony Brook, New York 11794-2275
Phone: 631-632-1813
Fax: 631-632-8052
Email: dmahajan@notes.cc.sunysb.edu
Even though the Engineering Science program has one program director, the Chemical
and Molecular Engineering Program currently has two co-directors. Since the program is
in its inception, it requires the development of new courses and laboratories, purchases of
large amounts of equipment, and certification of new laboratories. This work load is
much larger than that of a program in routine operation, and hence the undergraduate
program committee decided that it was in the best interest of the students to distribute the
workload between two faculty members.
The rationale for this is three-fold:
By distributing the load, (a) the program could grow faster and meet the deadlines
required for graduating the first classes in a timely manner; (b) we could provide the
students with additional counseling and advising time which we felt was needed in order
to navigate through a program under development; (c) we could be more efficient at
meetings with students and at obtaining rapid feedback which would then be used to
improve the program.
4.2 Undergraduate Program Committee (UPC)
The UPC is appointed by the Department Chair and it is charged with (a) deliberating on
curriculum and program issues (b) establishing admission and graduation requirements
and (c) accepting senior theses. In addition to the CME faculty, the UPC must have one
student member and one representative from the Engineering Science program.
The current members of the UPC are:
1. Clive Clayton
Title: Leading Professor
Position: Representative of the Engineering Science Program
Address: Department of Materials Science and Engineering
Stony Brook University
Stony Brook, New York 11794-2275
Phone: 631-632-9272
Fax: 631-632-8052
Email: cclayton@notes.cc.sunysb.edu
2. Dilip Gersappe
Title: Associate Professor
Position: Engineering Science Program and the Chemical and Molecular
Engineering Program
Address: Department of Materials Science and Engineering
Stony Brook University
12
Stony Brook, New York 11794-2275
Phone: 631-632-8499
Fax: 631-632-8052
Email: dgersappe@notes.cc.sunysb.edu
3. Nadine Pernodet
Title: Assistant Professor
Position: Chemical and Molecular Engineering Program
Address: Department of Materials Science and Engineering
Stony Brook University
Stony Brook, New York 11794-2275
Phone: 631-632-8491
Fax: 631-632-8052
Email: npernodet@notes.cc.sunysb.edu
4. Miriam Rafailovich
Title: Professor
Position: Engineering Science Program and Chemical and Molecular Engineering
Program
Address: Department of Materials Science and Engineering
Stony Brook University
Stony Brook, New York 11794-2275
Phone: 631-632-8498
Fax: 631-632-8052
Email: mrafailovich@notes.cc.sunysb.edu
5. Student Representative
Title: Undergraduate
Position: Chemical and Molecular Engineering Program
4.3 Data Collection and Analysis Committee (DCAC)
Data collection and subsequent evaluation is an important tool that will be used to
monitor the outcomes of the program. In particular the data will be used to determine the
degree to which the program objectives are met, as will be explained later when the
Program Outcome Assessment loop is described. The UPC felt that this was a demanding
task and therefore appointed a subcommittee charged with data collection and analysis.
This committee then presents its findings to the entire UPC, which then evaluates the
results and decides on appropriate actions.
The current members of the DCAC are:
1. Lynn Allopenna
Position: Assistant to the Chair
Address: Department of Materials Science and Engineering
Stony Brook University
Stony Brook, New York 11794-2275
Phone: 631-632-8484
13
Fax: 631-632-8052
Email: lallopenna@notes.cc.sunysb.edu
2. Tadanori Koga
Title: Assistant Professor
Position: Chemical and Molecular Engineering Program
Address: Department of Materials Science and Engineering
Stony Brook University
Stony Brook, New York 11794-2275
Phone: 631-632-8485
Fax: 631-632-8052
Email: tkoga@notes.cc.sunysb.edu
3. Devinder Mahajan
Title: Research Professor
Position: Chemical and Molecular Engineering Program
Address: Department of Materials Science and Engineering
Stony Brook University
Stony Brook, New York 11794-2275
Phone: 631-632-1813
Fax: 631-632-8052
Email: dmahajan@notes.cc.sunysb.edu
4.4 Senior Thesis Committee (STC)
Seniors are required to submit a senior thesis prior to graduation. The thesis proposal is
written as part of CME 410, where the student formulates the ideas for the project, and
with the help of the course instructor selects his Senior Thesis Committee and advisor.
The selection must then be approved by the UPC. The STC is comprised of the
designated advisor, who must be a CME faculty, and two other faculty members, at least
one of whom must be external to the CME department and preferably to the university.
Emphasis will be made in selecting members from national laboratories or industry. The
student first submits the proposal to the STC which must be approved before he/she
begins work on the thesis topic. The student then meets with the STC at least two more
times during the academic year prior to the final submission and defense of the thesis.
Final approval by the STC signifies that the thesis satisfies the requirements for
graduation.
4.5 Course Coordinating Committee (CCC)
This committee is charged with reviewing the course content, student performance, and
instructor evaluation in their areas of expertise. The core CME courses are divided into
four subsets, and two coordinators are assigned to each course subset as follows:
Subset 1 Fundamentals and Modeling
CME 101 Introduction to Chemical and Molecular Engineering
CME 300 Writing in Chemical and Molecular Engineering
CME 315 Numerical Methods and Statistical Analysis
CME 327 Molecular Modeling for Chemical Engineers
CME 304 Chemical Engineering Thermodynamics I
14
CME 314 Chemical Engineering Thermodynamics II
Course Evaluators: Pernodet and Mahajan
Subset 2 Transport Phenomenon and Reaction Engineering
CME 312 Material and Energy Balance
CME 318 Chemical Engineering Fluid Mechanics
CME 322 Chemical Engineering Heat and Mass Transfer
CME 323 Reaction Engineering and Chemical Kinetics
CME 401 Separation Technologies I
CME 402 Separation Technologies II
Course Evaluators: Rafailovich and Gersappe
Subset 3 Unit Operation, Process Control and Design
CME 310 Chemical Engineering Lab I: Unit Operation and Fundamentals
CME 320 Chemical Engineering Laboratory II: Chemical and Molecular
Engineering
CME 440 Process Engineering Design I
CME 441 Process Engineering Design II
Course Evaluators: Koga and Pernodet
Subset 4 Senior Thesis
CME 410 Chemical Engineering Laboratory III: Directed Research I: Thesis
Proposal
CME 420 Chemical Engineering Laboratory IV: Directed Research II: Senior
Thesis
Course Evaluators: Mahajan, and Rafailovich
15
B. Accreditation Summary
1. Students
1.1 Student Admission and Evaluation
Stony Brook is a highly selective research university, seeking to enroll those students
who demonstrate the intellectual curiosity and academic ability to succeed. While there is
no formal deadline for freshman applicants, students are encouraged to apply for fall
admission by December 1 and for spring admission by November 1 of the previous year.
Prospective students can access the application and all relevant details online at
http://www.stonybrook.edu/ugadmissions/freshman/ and may submit the completed
application online or through the mail.
Stony Brook evaluates applicants on an individual basis. For general undergraduate
admission to the University, there are no specific cutoffs in the admission process, either
in grade point average, class rank, or standardized test scores. The staff of the
Undergraduate Admissions Office seeks to enroll the strongest and most diverse class
possible. Successful applicants to the University will typically meet the following
criteria:
A high school diploma or equivalent (a Regents diploma is preferred for New York
State residents)
A strong high school academic program that includes the following courses (one unit
is equal to one year of high school study):
o 4 units of English
o 4 units of social studies
o 3 units of mathematics
o 3 units of science
o 2 or 3 units of a foreign language
Standardized test scores that indicate the promise of success in a rigorous
undergraduate course of study.
As a guide, the Undergraduate Admissions Office uses a number of parameters to assess
the qualifications of freshman applicants: (1) high school average for grades 9 through 11
(and in some cases, a record of the first semester of grade 12 may be required); (2)
strength of the high school curriculum (e.g. New York State Regents or college-
preparatory vs. non-Regents or remedial or vocational curricula, Advanced Placement
courses and/or Honors curricula, and complete course sequences in mathematics and the
sciences); (3) scores on SAT or ACT; (4) grade trends (a stable, strong performance or an
upward trend is regarded favorably, while an erratic performance or downward trend is
regarded unfavorably); and (5) recommendations from teachers or guidance counselors
when submitted.
Students interested in majors offered within the CEAS must indicate their specific
interest on the admissions application. Qualified students can be admitted directly into
these programs. However, admission to the University does not guarantee acceptance into
the CEAS programs. For direct admission to a CEAS program, the Office of
16
Undergraduate Admissions reviews applications using criteria stipulated by the CEAS
faculty in 1996, standards that are higher than those for general University admission as
indicated above including: (1) successful completion of a New York State Regents
curriculum (as applicable) with Regents Examination grades not less than 80 in all
subjects; (2) completion of four units of mathematics including Sequential Mathematics,
(3) four units of science including Chemistry and Physics; (4) an un-weighted high
school average of 88 or higher, and (5) a combined SAT score of at least 1100.
Additionally, specific attention is given to strength of the high school curriculum,
performance on science and mathematics Regents examinations, Advanced Placement
(AP) credits, and evidence of motivation for the pursuit of scientific/engineering studies.
1.2 Undergraduate Colleges
The University has in place undergraduate colleges built around six themes to nurture
incoming students and give them a sense of belonging. All admitted students belong to
one of the colleges to help students match their potential with rich resources the
university has to offer. Further details about these colleges can be viewed at the following
web link: http://www.stonybrook.edu/sb/colleges/
1.3 Additional Requirements Specific to CME
The CME curriculum has one of the more rigorous foundation course requirements
within CEAS. Therefore the undergraduate program committee has decided that
students wishing to be enrolled in the CME program must meet the set-forth CEAS
minimum requirements as well as additional requirements outlined below, which will
ensure that they can succeed with the entry level courses.
1.3.1 CME Freshman Admission Policy
To be admitted to the Chemical and Molecular Engineering Program as a freshman,
students must meet the minimum criteria of a combined score on the two traditional
components of the SAT (critical reading and math) of 1300 or an ACT score of 30 and an
un-weighted high school average of 93 or higher. It is important to have succeeded in
challenging courses while showing energy and leadership in extracurricular areas of
interest, such as the visual, performing, and literary arts; athletics; or science and
independent research.
Overall, the Office of Admissions exercises flexibility in consideration of individual
applicants’ strengths and/or special relevant accomplishments that demonstrate
extraordinary interest in and motivation for engineering and applied sciences, including
achievement in engineering and computer science-related research projects and
competitions. Flexibility is also exercised with an eye towards the resources and structure
of the degree program such that a higher high school average and SAT scores may be
applied as criteria for admission. The enrollment and SAT-score history for the CME
program is given in Table 1.1.
17
1.3.2 Acceptance in the Major in CME
Freshmen who have specified their interests in the CME major may be accepted
directly into the major upon admission to the university if they satisfy the above stated
requirements.
Transfer applicants from other institutions require a semester of residency at Stony Brook
University and completion of at least one semester equivalent of courses on the CME
grid.
Applicants admitted to the university, but not immediately accepted into the Chemical
and Molecular Engineering program, may apply for acceptance at any time during the
academic year by contacting one of the co-directors of the undergraduate program. Final
decision on admission will be made by the undergraduate program director. Minimum
requirements for admission are as follows;
a. Students must have completed the required math, physics, and chemistry sequence
from the CME grid with a grade of B or better.
b. Students must have an overall GPA of 3.0 with no more than one grade of C or lower
in any course, unless permission to waive is granted by the undergraduate program
director.
c. Department must receive completed course evaluations for all transferred courses that
are to be used to meet course requirements of the major.
1.3.3 Continuation in the CME Major
In order to advance in the major beyond the foundation set of courses (math,
physics, and chemistry sequence in the CME grid), students must have completed CME
304 (Thermodynamics) with a grade of B- or higher. The UPC feels this is a pivotal
course upon which many of the upper level courses are based. Hence the students must
demonstrate the ability to comprehend the materials and master the mathematics and
chemistry content.
A summary of the student body admitted into the CME major is tabulated in Table B1.1.
The data indicate a steady annual growth in the number of CME majors, even though the
number of new admits directly into the freshman year has remained fairly constant. The
transfers so afar have been internal and no student has transferred into the program from
other universities.
From this data we can see that most of the CME students enter the program after they are
admitted to the university. A large fraction of these students are recruited from the CME
101 class that explains the field of chemical engineering to a general audience.
Unfortunately though, roughly only one third of the applicants meet the requirements
stated above which would qualify them for acceptance into the program.
We hope that obtaining accreditation will enable us to compete more effectively with
other Chemical Engineering programs and increase the acceptance rate among those
applying to our program directly from high school. As can also be seen, the average SAT
scores of those admitted are higher than average for incoming freshmen both into CEAS
and the University as a whole. The scores are more in line with the Honors College.
Consequently the ability to recruit more effectively among this group of students will
18
help maintain the high academic standards and quality of education that are part of the
mission of our program.
Table B1.1 Stony Brook Undergraduate Chemical & Molecular Engineering
Students at a Glance
New CME Average SAT
New CME
Total CME majors score
Academic Year majors
majors (freshman (freshman
transfers
only) only)
2004-05 7 0 4 1340
2005-06 16 0 4 1253
2006-07 22 0 6 1315
2007-08
1.4 Student Advising and Monitoring
Since there are two program directors, at least one of them is available each day to cover
the period from 10 AM through 6 PM to meet with students and counsel them regarding
the CME program. Each student that is admitted into the program is required, prior to
registration, to meet with one of the program directors and determine where he/she stands
on the CME grid towards completion of the program requirements. Students are also
required to select a specialization no later than their third semester into the CME program
and discuss their choice with one of the program directors. The Assistant to the Chair is
also available daily during that time. She can answer questions regarding general
requirements for admission to the major, lifting registration blocks imposed in order to
ensure that each student first meets with an advisor prior to registration in the higher level
courses; approve prerequisite substitutions, technical elective alternatives and scheduling
coordination of classes. For more complex problems, she advises students to make
appointments with either of the co Program Directors. These problems include: formal
admission into the major; transferring credits from other institutions; any prerequisite
substitutions that are not standard, etc.
As the program grows, and more faculty is hired, each student that is admitted to the
chemical and molecular engineering major will be assigned a faculty advisor. It will be
mandatory that the advisor be consulted prior to registration for every academic year and
will be available for discussion at any time during the hours posted outside Room 314 in
the Old Engineering Building. Students are encouraged to discuss with their advisors any
academic matters pertaining to their studies at Stony Book. Information on assigned
advisors will be obtained in the Department office, Room 314, Engineering Building.
1.4.1 The Fundamentals Exam (FE)
Students accepted into the program starting in the fall 2007 semester will be required to
take the FE exam. While the FE exam is not a requirement for graduation, taking the
19
exam is mandatory. The FE exam data will provide us, as well as the student, an external
evaluation of his/her mastery of the ABET based Chemical Engineering curriculum
relative to other chemical engineering students in the United States. We have instituted a
one credit preparatory class for the FE exam to assist students, which will be given in the
fall semester. Registration for the FE exam occurs in November, and is required for
completion of this course.
Students who pass the FE Exam are likely to gain a competitive edge in their career since
they are also better prepared for taking the follow-on Chemical Engineering PE Exam
after graduation and work experience. Alumni who will sit for the PE exam, also have an
important advantage in furthering their career goals in the chemical engineering
profession since passing the examination not only indicates that they are well prepared
in all aspects of the chemical engineering profession, but clearly demonstrates that they
have the skills needed for engaging in lifelong learning and career advancement.
1.5 Graduation Clearance
The Department keeps a graduation clearance checklist for each student (copies of these
sheets are provided to students in the specialization guides located in Room 314).
Samples of the checklists are in Section B.f of the Appendix of this report and include an
explicit accounting of required category credits, except for the Humanities and Social
Sciences requirements, which are administered by the CEAS Dean’s Office. Students
may meet with their advisor or the Undergraduate Program Director to discuss their
graduation requirements at any time. Every fall semester, the Undergraduate Program
Director invites all seniors individually to a graduation clearance interview. At that time,
the graduation requirements are reviewed with the student and explicit plans for
completing the requirements are laid out.
All transcripts of students who apply for graduation are reviewed by the CME assistant to
the Department Chair and the CEAS Associate Dean of Students. If the requirements
outlined below have been met, the student is cleared for graduation.
CME requirements:
(a) Completion of the CME core curriculum, as outlined in Figure 5.1 course grid,
with a grade of C or better in each of the CME designated courses.
(b) Satisfactory completion of the general university requirements as outlined below;
Residency: After the 57th credit earned, at least 36 credits must be earned at Stony
Brook. In addition, for B.E. degree programs, at least seven approved engineering
courses or technical electives must be completed in the CEAS.
Grade Point Average (GPA): A minimum cumulative GPA of 2.00 is required for all
academic work at Stony Brook. Per the University policy, grades for courses
completed at transfer institutions are not included in the Stony Brook GPA.
Major Requirements: Students must satisfy all requirements of a declared major.
Upper-Division Credit Requirement: At least 39 credits must be earned in upper-
division courses, i.e. courses numbered 300 or higher. (Some of these credits may be
20
earned through transfer courses that have been individually evaluated by faculty as
equivalent to Stony Brook upper-division level courses.)
General Education Requirements (Entry Skills and Diversified Education Curriculum
(D.E.C.)): CEAS Students must satisfy Entry Skills 1 and 2 (Basic Mathematics
Competence and Basic Writing Competence) and the D.E.C. categories specified for
their program degree and major. The D.E.C. course categories required for the CME
majors are included in the Bulletin and the on-line version of the 8-semester sequence
CME grid.
The University degree requirements, including the D.E.C. checklist, appear in a
variety of publications including the Undergraduate Bulletin, the Academic Planning
Guide, the Transfer Guide (all given to students at orientation) and the Online
Bulletin.
Students must apply for graduation with the University Office of Records (Registrar) and,
after having done so, are considered “degree candidates.” A two-fold process is used to
certify that each graduate has met graduation requirements complying with EAC
(Engineering Accreditation Committee) criteria. The first is administered by the CEAS
Undergraduate Student Office and the second by the separate academic departments for
their own degree program(s).
The CEAS Undergraduate Student Office is charged with overall responsibility for
advising about and ensuring adherence to University degree requirements, specifically
including general education (D.E.C.) requirements as they apply to CEAS programs.
Advisors in this office provide ongoing general education monitoring and advising from
the student’s first year. Students are urged to review their own Degree Audit Reports at
any time using the SOLAR System to ensure that they are making satisfactory progress
towards completion of all University degree requirements, and also to review their CEAS
major checklists with their Undergraduate Program Director every semester. (The Degree
Audit report does not include requirements for the program major.)
In the CEAS Undergraduate Student Office, the transcript of each degree candidate is
reviewed using the Degree Audit Report, accessible to authorized advisors. This report
includes all University requirements applicable for the student’s college and major: Skills
requirements; General Education/D.E.C. requirements; credits including upper-division
credits; cumulative GPA; and for each requirement cites how the requirement has been
met or if it is not yet met. Deficiencies are flagged in boldface type. Students with
deficiencies are notified by letter. The Assistant Dean and CEAS Senior Academic
Advisor are responsible for issuing the first level of University degree clearance in the
Student Administration system, either ‘Pending,’ ‘Denied,’ or ‘Approved.’ and for entry
of relevant comments if any, most often to list specific deficiencies.
Certification of completion of program major requirements to ensure compliance with
EAC criteria is the responsibility of the Chemical and Molecular Engineering Program,
specifically the Undergraduate Program Director. The Department maintains a checklist
which may be regularly updated to account for any modifications in program
requirements and course offerings. An individual checklist file is kept for each student,
especially in those cases in which students have met requirements through transfer credit.
21
The requirements checklist is based on the student’s date of matriculation or date of
admission to the major program.
When both the College’s Undergraduate Student Office and Chemical & Molecular
Engineering have completed their reviews and entered the final status at the end of the
semester, the Office of Records (Registrar) runs the final review process, the Exception
Report, to check for any repeated courses, mutually exclusive courses, coursework past
degree date, unresolved or missing grades, residency requirement completion, cumulative
GPA, and any financial obligations noted by the Bursar’s Office. Following this review,
the Registrar issues final degree clearances to those students who have met all
requirements of their degree programs, the College, and the University. Diplomas are
mailed to the graduates by the Office of Records. (Although the degree is awarded when
there are outstanding financial obligations to the University, these must be paid in order
to receive the diploma and official transcripts.)
1.6 Transfer Credit Validation
Stony Brook’s Transfer Admission Office routinely prepares tables of course equivalents
for a number of SUNY and CUNY institutions. Many of these are available online at
www.stonybrook.edu/admissions/transfer. For those institutions that represent primary
regional feeder schools for Stony Brook (Suffolk County Community College, Nassau
County Community College, CUNY-all campuses and SUNY Farmingdale) most first
and second year courses have been evaluated by Stony Brook faculty and the transfer
equivalencies are listed in the Stony Brook Transfer Guide published by the University
Transfer Office every two years. The Guide is given to all new transfer students at
orientation sessions and is also available to students in the Transfer Office, the CEAS
Undergraduate Student Office, and the College of Arts and Sciences Academic and Pre-
Professional Advising Center.
Upon matriculation, the Transfer Office evaluates the student’s official transcript(s) and
enters the total number of credits accepted in transfer courses into the student’s Stony
Brook transcript. The courses are evaluated individually for all courses passed with a
letter grade of C or higher at a regionally accredited institution. No credit is given for
courses with grades of C- or lower. All acceptable credits are added to the Stony Brook
record as transfer credit. Transfer course grades are not shown nor are they included in
the calculation of the student’s Stony Brook GPA. The evaluation includes lower- versus
upper-division credits and applicability for fulfillment of general education requirements
to meet the University’s D.E.C. requirements. Almost all credits earned at community
colleges are considered to be lower-division (100 or 200/ freshman or sophomore) credit.
Credits earned through standardized external examinations such as Advanced Placement
(AP), CLEP, Excelsior College Examinations (New York State), and Stony Brook’s own
Challenge Program are also added to the Stony Brook transcript but again, are not
factored into the Stony Brook GPA. If credits are awarded that do no meet any specific
degree requirement at the University, those credits are considered electives in the
student’s program.
Transfer students admitted to a CEAS program, whether at the time of University
admission or in a subsequent semester, are responsible for completing the Transfer Credit
Evaluation Form for each course completed at another institution that is to be used to
22
meet a specific requirement of the CEAS program major. These transfer courses are
evaluated by the faculty of the analogous Stony Brook department offering similar
courses. Evaluation is based on the official catalog course description of the instructing
institution and/or the syllabus of the course, credit hours, textbook used and, in some
cases, a consultation with the student. The faculty member(s) certifies course
equivalence as applicable. With the designated faculty approval, the course is deemed
equivalent and accepted by the Department in meeting the program major requirement. If
the course is not deemed equivalent in that it has not covered the topics covered by the
relevant Stony Brook course, the student must take the course at Stony Brook. The
Department maintains files for transfer students that include relevant documentation for
transfer courses accepted to meet program requirements. For mathematics courses,
evaluation also considers the student’s score on the Stony Brook Mathematics Placement
Examination administered online prior to summer and intersession orientation sessions.
Occasionally, students wish to take a course at another institution during their
matriculation at Stony Brook. This happens, for example, if students (especially transfer
students) find themselves out of sequence; credit for a summer course at another
institution might ease their subsequent scheduling problems. In these cases, students may
request advanced written permission from the Undergraduate Program Director of the
Department to ensure that such courses taken off campus are transferable.
The CEAS Dean’s Office maintains active and accessible records of transfer students for
all Engineering departments. Although transfer credit problems are often quite vexing for
students, the Department and College decided that, to maintain transfer credits standards,
it is best to follow the present policy wherein the appropriate department is responsible
for transfer credit approval. While it is time-consuming, every attempt is made to assist
the student in carrying out this process.
Assessment of the CEAS transfer policies began in 1999 by the CTPC through the use of
the course instructor survey. Through 2006 no instructor singled out transfer students as
having problems with preparation for their courses. Beginning with the 2001 academic
year, the CEAS Office conducts a year-end audit of graduating seniors to compare
transfer students to non-transfer students.
From the table we can see that overall transfer student perform as well as non-transfer
students at graduation indicating that the general CEAS transfer policy does not put them
at a disadvantage. We will track this data for CME students as it becomes available in the
coming years, but since we will have similar transfer policies, we do not expect a
significantly different outcome.
Table B1.2 Average GPA values for CEAS graduates for transfer and non-transfer
students
2003-04 2004 - 05 2005 - 06 3-year average
Transfer* 3.061 (n=179) 3.024 (n=198) 3.036 (n=177) 3.040 (n=554)
Non-Transfer 3.084 (n=286) 3.100 (n=261) 3.085 (n=254) 3.090 (n=801)
23
2. Program Educational Objectives (PEOs)
2.1 Mission Statements
Mission of Stony Brook University (UM)
(UM1): to provide comprehensive undergraduate, graduate, and professional education of
the highest quality;
(UM2): to carry out research and intellectual endeavors of the highest international
standards that advance theoretical knowledge and are of immediate and long-range
practical significance;
(UM3): to provide leadership for economic growth, technology, and culture for
neighboring communities and the wider geographic region;
(UM4): to provide state-of-the-art innovative health care, while serving as a resource to a
regional health care network and to the traditionally underserved;
(UM5): to fulfill these objectives while celebrating diversity and positioning the
University in the global community.
Mission of the College of Engineering and Applied Sciences (CM)
(CM1): Comprehensive, high-quality undergraduate education
(CM2): Advanced graduate education and research opportunities for graduate
students and practicing professionals
(CM3): Leading edge research programs that probe the frontiers of knowledge
and contribute to the development of globally competitive economies, both
regionally and nationally
(CM4): Technology transfer that promotes industrial development, with particular
emphasis on the needs of Long Island industry
Mission of the program in Chemical and Molecular Engineering (CME)
CME1: To serve the community by becoming a resource for regional economic
development.
CME2: To serve the nation by training students who can assume leadership in
technological innovation, public service and ethical standards.
CME3: To achieve international recognition as a center of excellence in molecularly
based chemical engineering, education, and research.
2.2 Constituencies
Constituencies of Stony Brook’s undergraduate CME program are listed and described
below. The information obtained from surveys, town hall meetings, reports and
interviews with the constituents is used to evaluate the program according to the
assessment loop described in the Section 4.
24
• Students: Data is acquired from three types of students: (a) Incoming freshmen
who are applying to the program (b) Students already enrolled at Stony Brook and
in particular those taking CME 101 who are interested in the program (c) Students
already in the program.
• Alumni: These are students who have completed the program and have graduated
from the university. Their experiences are very valuable in evaluating whether we
are meeting our PEOs.
• Industry: Three types of industrial input is solicited: (a) Industries that have
employed our students as interns or employees (b) Regional industries who
requested the creation of this program (c) National industrial base of companies
who employ chemical engineers and who can rank our program relative to those
from other schools.
• Graduate Schools: (a) Graduate school advanced degree program directors that
have accepted our graduates (b) Graduate directors in chemical engineering
departments of schools ranked in the top 20% by the NRC, who can evaluate
whether our curriculum adequately prepares our students for admission to their
programs.
• Department Faculty: Faculty members in both programs of the Department of
Materials Science and Engineering have a vested interest in the growth of the
program. Hence input is solicited both at the UPC meetings and in faculty surveys
in order to assess the effectiveness of the CME program to attain international
recognition for the department.
• Faculty at other universities with strong departments in chemical engineering: In
order to develop the best possible educational program for our students, we
survey faculty outside of our department. We solicit their opinions regarding our
curriculum and are constantly looking at new models in other departments to
compare “notes” with other faculty in order to keep abreast of emerging
educational trends in teaching modern chemical engineering theory and practice.
2.3 PEOs’ for CME
The mission statement of the program was drafted by the founding members of the
undergraduate program committee. The mission was determined based on meeting the
needs of the constituents of the program, as determined by: a survey of regional
industries on Long Island and in the New York metropolitan area; incoming freshmen;
students and faculty at Stony Brook University; universities and community colleges at
other SUNY and CUNY campuses; part-time students enrolled in the industrial
programs; and directors of graduate programs in chemical engineering at research
oriented institutions.
The four PEOs drafted below are consistent with the mission of the program. Below each
PEO is the measuring tool used.
25
PEO 1: The students will be prepared to assume positions in industry or research
institutions that require knowledge of chemical engineering principles.
Measure: The alumni will be surveyed as to their places of employment and the skills
required to fulfill their job descriptions. At least 40% should be employed in areas that
require knowledge of chemical engineering practice one year after graduation, and at
least 60% should fulfill this requirement five years after graduation.
PEO 2: The students will be prepared to demonstrate leadership, teamwork, and
communication skills.
Measure: The alumni will be surveyed on the size of the teams in which they work, the
number of people they supervise, and the number of presentations and reports that they
deliver each year. Of those employed for one year to five years, at least 30% should work
in teams of three or more, and be responsible for at least one technical report, oral or
written, per year. Those employed for five years should supervise two or more
employees.
Employers will be surveyed and asked to rank, on a scale of 1 to 4, the performance of
our graduates regarding ability to work in teams, communication, and leadership
responsibilities.
PEO 3: The students will be committed to lifelong learning, ethical conduct, and be able
to meet the constantly emerging needs of the chemical engineering profession.
Measure: At least 50% of those that graduated within one to five years of the survey
should have current memberships in the American Institute of Chemical Engineers
(AIChE) or other professional societies, attended job related training workshops,
technical degree programs, have enrolled in continuing education short courses through
AIChE, attended technical conferences, presented papers at national or international
conferences, or published in refereed technical journals.
We will survey employers, graduate and professional school directors regarding the
ethical behavior, honesty, and ability of our alumni to be responsible for their actions.
PEO 4: The students will be educated in chemical engineering fundamentals and modern
computational tools that enable them to succeed in graduate programs and research in
chemical engineering.
Measure: At least 10% of our alumni should be accepted into graduate programs and
after three or more years have either been able to pass qualifying examinations or
satisfactorily completed research theses.
The PEOs and the associated metrics are tabulated in Table B2.1. The metrics allow us to
quantitatively determine if the graduates of the program meet the criteria of the PEOs.
26
Table B2.1 Summary of PEOs and the associated metrics
PEO Tool Measure Frequency
1 Alumni Survey Positions that require knowledge of CME: Annually
• At least 40% employed in the Chemical
Engineering profession 1 yr after graduation.
• At least 60% are employed in the Chemical
Engineering profession 5 yrs after graduation
• Approximately 20% enrolled in graduate programs
requiring knowledge of CME
2 Alumni Survey • Teamwork: At least 30% are part of a team or Annually
participate in an interdisciplinary project at work or
in graduate school
• Leadership: At least 20% supervise one or more
people 2 years after graduation and 60% 5 years
after graduation
• Communication skills: At least 50% have presented
an internal report in written or oral form
• At least 20% have submitted a paper for publication
or presented a paper orally at a national conference
• More than 60% of the employers polled rank our
graduates’ ability to work in teams, show
leadership and initiative and communicate to a
broad audience as better than average (score greater
than 2 on a scale from 1 to 4)
Employer Survey Annually
3 Alumni Survey • Lifelong learning: At least 50% of the alumni are Annually
members of a professional society 1 year after
graduation and 70% within five years
• At least 50% have attended professional
conferences or published papers in technical
journals within 5 years after graduation
• Emerging needs: At least 20% have registered for
training courses or attended post graduate classes
within 2 years of graduation or are preparing to take
the PE examination
• Ethical and moral conduct: 90% of employers or
graduate program directors surveyed rank the
ethical and moral conduct of our graduates as above
Employer or graduate average (3 or better on a scale of 1 to 4) Annually
program survey
4 Alumni Survey • Succeed in Graduate programs: At least 80% of Annually
those attending graduate school were accepted into
the program of their first choice
• At least 70% of those in graduate programs have
passed the qualifying exams after 3 yrs.
• Knowledge of CME fundamentals: At least 80% of
Graduate School our graduates are making satisfactory progress (a Annually
Directors score of at least 2 on a scale of 1 to 4) in their
research or degree programs
27
2.3.1 Relationship of the PEO to the mission of Stony Brook University
The relationship of the PEOs to the university mission is tabulated below. It
should be noted that a large fraction of the constituencies of the CME program are
pharmaceutical and tissue engineering companies. The program therefore has close ties
with the health sciences center and the departments of pharmacology and biomedical
engineering. Hence the mission and the PEOs address the ability of our students to
provide innovation in health care, even though we are not part of the school of medicine,
and participate directly in any program that leads to health care certification.
Furthermore, we have initiated a new BE/MD program where students can be admitted
from high school straight into the CME program and guaranteed admission into the Stony
Brook School of Medicine, provided they satisfactorily graduate from out program and
obtain a score no lower than 28 on the MCAT examination. This new program is in
complete accordance with the mission of the university.
Table B2.2 Relationship of the PEOs to the University Mission
PEO1 PEO2 PEO3 PEO4
UM1 X X
UM2 X X
UM3 X
UM4
UM5 X X
2.3.2 Relationship of the PEO to the mission of CEAS
The mission of the CEAS emphasizes high quality education which will enable
our students to be a resource for the region and compete effectively in the global
marketplace. The CEAS had traditionally aimed at being an engine for regional economic
development leading to job creation on Long Island. The rapid growth of pharmaceutical
and nanotechnology related industries in the New York Metropolitan area were one of the
driving forces in the creation of our program. Consequently our program objectives are
closely related to those of the CEAS and meet the national need for highly trained
chemical engineers in the nanotechnology markets. These are summarized in Table B2.3
below.
Table B2.3 Relationship of the PEOs to the Mission of the CEAS
PEO1 PEO2 PEO3 PEO4
CM1 X X X
CM2 X X
CM3 X X
CM4 X
28
3. Program Outcomes and Assessment
In this section we will describe the relationship between the program objectives and the
program outcomes, as set forth in ABET Criterion 3. We will describe the metrics that we
have developed to quantitatively measure the outcomes and then how we are using these
results as feedback for continuous improvement of the program.
Basically the self-assessment occurs within two loops. The first loop is a “rapid” loop
where results are assessed in the first and last month of each semester. This loop is
designed to quantitatively measure whether the program is adequate and the students are
prepared to satisfy the expected outcomes at the time of graduation. As we will show,
data are continuously acquired within this loop, assessed, and action taken to further
improve the program. The frequency of self-evaluation is higher than in other programs,
but we feel that it is necessary since the program is new and we hope to correct even
potential deficiencies before they develop into problems.
The second loop is slower and designed to evaluate whether we are meeting the overall
objectives of the program. Here data are collected from alumni and other constituents
who are in contact only with those students who have graduated and who can evaluate the
performance of those who have completed the program and are now either in the
workforce or engaged in post-graduate studies or professional schools.
3.1 Program Outcomes
The following are the program outcomes as set forth in ABET criterion 3:
a. An ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering to chemical
engineering problems
b. An ability to design and conduct experiments, as well as to analyze and interpret data
c. An ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs within
realistic constraints such as economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health and
safety, manufacturability, and sustainability
d. An ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams
e. An ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems
f. An understanding of professional and ethical responsibility
g. An ability to communicate effectively orally and in writing
h. The broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a
global economic, environmental, and societal context
i. A recognition of the need for, and an ability to, engage in life-long learning
j. A knowledge of contemporary issues
k. An ability to use the techniques, skills, and modern engineering and computing tools
necessary for engineering practice
The course syllabi for the curriculum were developed such that each of the courses
addresses some subset of these program outcomes. The outcomes are addressed through a
series of courses throughout the program and hence the concepts are continuously
reinforced. Part of the assessment process, as seen in the loops described later in this
section, addresses how well these outcomes are being met by each course and to what
extent the students have actually mastered the particular skills. The continuous process is
29
important so that deficiencies can be identified early in the program when they are easier
to remedy.
Each course within our program addresses at least one of the outcomes. The fraction of
the time spent on each outcome for each course is summarized in Figure 3.1 below and
stated in the course syllabi in the appendix.
Since each course is assigned a specific amount of credit/hours it is possible to determine
the total amount of credit/hours or fraction of the 138 credits in the program that are
allocated to course material addressing each objective. These values are listed in Table
B3.1 for each course. These data can be further analyzed to generate the bar chart shown
in Figure B3.1 where we plot the total fraction of credit hours in the program spent on
each outcome.
From the figure we can immediately see that the largest amount of effort is spent on
outcomes a-c, e, and k. These outcomes address the more quantitative aspects of the
program, which students find more difficult and hence a larger amount of classroom time
needs to be spent on these areas. Outcomes d and f-j relate more to workplace relevance,
which requires teamwork, ethical conduct, and the ability to communicate effectively.
These are skills learned more through practice and less in formal classroom settings.
Hence they constitute a smaller fraction of the program credit hours.
We recognize that time allocated to a specific outcome is not necessarily an indicator of
the degree to which the students have mastered a specific skill. Furthermore, not all the
outcomes are of equal complexity and hence require different time allocations. On the
other hand, since we also evaluate the students’ performance in each of these areas, the
amount of time allocated is helpful in identifying where a redistribution of effort may be
needed should a clear deficiency in any of the areas become evident later.
Furthermore, when we evaluate our ability to achieve the program objectives, using the
metrics described later, we can also trace any deficiencies to the time allocated to
preparation of the students.
30
Figure B3.1 Percent of credit hours in program allocated to preparation relating to
each outcome
Percentage of tim e spent on outcom es in classes
30%
25%
Percent of program
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
a b c d e f g h i j k
A-K Outcom es
3.2 The relationship between the CME curriculum and the program outcomes
When the CME curriculum was established, the instructors preparing the courses were
asked to conform to the ABET 2000 standards. The review process for each course was
as follows:
(1) The UPC assigned different faculty members to develop the core courses. Input was
solicited from faculty in other chemical engineering departments (Columbia, Brooklyn
Poly, Princeton) to ensure that the material covered in the courses was similar to that in
comparable programs. The instructors were asked to include elements of modern
chemical engineering practice, as well as elements incorporating nanoscale phenomena.
The instructors were also asked to determine the percentage of each of the ABET 3a-k
outcomes addressed by course and the strategy used to achieve this outcome. These are
tabulated below for each course in the core CME curriculum.
(2) The core program was divided into four divisions, as described previously, and two
evaluators were assigned to each division. The evaluators then collected the student
portfolios for each course and reviewed the materials used to address the ABET 3a-k
outcomes specified by the instructors, the strategies used to achieve these outcomes, and
the mean performance of the students for each strategy, which was a measure of its
effectiveness in communicating the outcome to the students. The evaluators then gave
each course two grades. One grade evaluated the appropriateness of the materials
presented to achieving the designated outcome and the second grade evaluated the ability
of the strategy chosen to communicate the outcome to the students.
For example outcome ‘a’ requires that the students obtain “an ability to apply knowledge
of mathematics, science, and engineering to chemical engineering problems.” The
31
instructor for CME 101 wrote that the students in this course learn to apply their
knowledge of mathematics etc. when they are asked to analyze what is being
accomplished in different subfields in the chemical engineering profession. The evaluator
thought that aspect of the course adequately addressed this outcome. The strategy used by
the instructor to achieve this outcome was to invite guest speakers employed in different
fields of chemical engineering and describe to the students what they do and where the
challenges lie. The students were then asked to present a synopsis of the lecture and apply
their knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering to explaining what the field is
about and the difficulty of the engineering challenge. In this case the evaluators reviewed
the portfolio materials and found that most, but not all of the students were able to
adequately comprehend the scientific and engineering challenges of the different
professions. Hence the strategy obtained a rating of 2. The grading rubric is described
below, with a grade of 2 (good) or lower being acceptable.
Course Course Outcome Rating Strategy to Achieve Rating
Outcome Outcome Strategy
CME 101 Students apply knowledge of 1 Students must write a synopsis of 2
mathematics, engineering, and each guest lecturer and describe
science to obtain an understanding the technological advances that are
of the challenges of different fields still to be made in his field.
in the chemical engineering Students must be able to apply
profession. their knowledge of mathematics
and science to evaluate the claims
of the speaker.
An example of an unacceptable rating for outcome f: “An understanding of
professional and ethical responsibility.” The instructor wrote that the outcome of his
course relating to this program outcome is the ability to assess the efficacy of a reactor
and understand safety and environmental considerations. The evaluator did not agree with
the instructor that this course outcome was relevant to outcome f. The strategy employed
i.e. lectures and data analysis etc. may be related to the course outcome, but in the
opinion of the evaluator, did not test the students understanding of professional and
ethical responsibility. Hence he rated this poorly as well. Based on this evaluation, the
instructor was asked to re-evaluate the curriculum in order to include materials which are
more representative of this program outcome and also present more appropriate strategies
for the students to learn materials relating to this outcome. The materials the instructor
will include next semester to achieve this outcome are currently being assessed, and the
entire course will be evaluated again at the end of next semester when the student
portfolios become available.
CME 323 • Assessment of the reactor 4 Lectures; Data analysis; Illustrative 4
efficacy for a specific chemical problems in class with students’
reaction participation.
• Safety and environmental Homework assignments and corrections
considerations with students’ participation in class.
Midterm; Final exam.
32
(3) The UPC then reviewed the outcomes of the course evaluators in order to determine if
the curriculum as a whole was consistent with the expected outcomes and ultimately the
objectives of the program and could be completed in a timely manner by the students.
For example, after examination of the courses it was determined that the curriculum did
not provide sufficient instruction in statistical evaluation of data, which impacted
outcome b and the computational part of k. We therefore changed the syllabus of CME
315 to include statistical analysis of data in addition to computer simulation of chemical
engineering processes such as batch processing and unit operations.
(4) The UPC then submitted the courses to the college CTPC which ensures that the
material met with the academic standards established by the CEAS, provided a fair credit
distribution for the course, and complied with the mission of the CEAS. The courses were
also reviewed by the CEAS ABET evaluation committee to ensure that the syllabi were
drafted in a format that would allow further evaluation in keeping with ABET 2000
criteria. For example, the revised materials addressing outcome f in CME 323 are now
being discussed by the UPC and will be presented for approval to the CEAS CTPC
committee when they reconvene at the end of August. If approved, the syllabus will be
modified accordingly and the course will be evaluated again in December.
The fraction of each course which is expected to result in specific outcomes mandated by
ABET criterion 3 is tabulated in Table B3.1
Table B3.1 Fraction of credit hours within each course allocated to ABET Criterion
3 Outcomes
101 199 201 304 310 312 314 315 318 320 322
a 10 10 10 23 8 17 23 17 22 9 20
b 30 10 16 34 26 21 17 22 34 20
c 10 13 12 9 16 10 23 17 22
d 10 10 5 9 3 9
e 10 20 17 10 13 9 17 22 3 23
f 15 5 10 5 5 5 5 2 3 5 5
g 20 5 10 2 7 2
h 15 5 10 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
i 15 5 20 2 2 2 2 10 2 2 2
j 15 5 20 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
k 5 20 10 15 20 20 10 2
323 327 371 401 402 410 420 440 441 470 488 499
a 9 22 18 30 24 10 15 18 18 9 10
b 40 22 20 9 10 43 70 32 26 50
c 27 8 10 9 17 10 27 36 14 17
d 10 8 9 20 10 17
e 10 22 15 26 25 10 10 10 10 10
f 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 10 10 5 5 10
g 10 5 3 8 10 2 5 10 10
h 2 2 5 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
i 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 10
j 2 2 5 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
k 3 15 10 10 10 10 10 10
33
Since our program is new and more flexible, we are placing a great deal of effort on
ensuring that there is sufficient focus on each of the program outcomes. We therefore
rated the ability of each course to meet the ABET 3a-k outcomes individually.
Basis for the Ratings
All courses were assessed by the assigned Course Coordination Committees (CCCs). A
list of course assignments and the associated committee members are shown in
Background Information, Section A4.5. The procedure set up to rate the course against
the ABET 3 a-k criteria is as follows:
• Before the final exam, all students were required to submit portfolios that contained
copies of all tests, presentations, quizzes, and homework assignments submitted by
the student for the course.
• The course content was assessed based on: 1) The course description approved by the
Curriculum & Teaching Policy Committee (CTPC) of the College of Engineering and
Applied Science (CEAS); and 2) the strategy outlined by the instructor to achieve the
course outcome.
• The CCC members provided an independent, ranked evaluation of: 1) the strategy to
achieve the stated outcome; and 2) the ability of the students to achieve the specified
outcome, using the materials together with the student portfolios.
• Each course was rated based on the following rating system.
Grading rubric:
1- Course outcome completely meets ABET outcome
2- Course outcome meets the majority of the ABET outcome
3- Course outcome only meets a part of the ABET outcome
4- Minimal match between course and ABET outcome
The second score was based on the effectiveness of the strategy listed to communicate the
outcome to the students. This score was based on the evaluation of the student portfolios
which reflected their cumulative work during the semester. These portfolios will be
available to the examiners at the visit. The scores listed reflected an overall average
among the students in the class.
Rubric: 1- Strategy is appropriate and students’ comprehension is high
2- Strategy is appropriate, student comprehension is average
3- Strategy is partially effective and student comprehension is below average
4- Minimal match between strategy and outcome
The tables below are generated as follows. In the first column we list the course numbers. In the
second column we list the outcomes of the course materials in each course designed to meet the
specified program objective. The course outcomes are attached in the appendix and are based on
the syllabi which were approved by the CTPC. The fourth column lists the specific strategies
used to achieve the outcome listed in column 2. These two are evaluated for each course and
each outcome by the designated reviewers within the CCC, with the expertise in the course
subject matter.
34
Note: Even though the UPC considers all courses including the electives for the program, only
the core courses were included for evaluation in this table.
The UPC then met to discuss the ratings of each course. The committee evaluated the
program as a whole and then determined whether specific remedies were needed for
individual course. The following paragraphs summarize the committee’s comments and
recommendations, if any, to further improve the course.
35
Table B3.2.1 Producing Outcome A
Ability to apply knowledge of math, engineering, and science
Outcome Rubric: 1-Course outcome completely meets ABET outcome; 2-Course outcome meets the
majority of the ABET outcome; 3-Course outcome only meets a part of the ABET outcome; 4-Mimimal
match between course and ABET outcome
Strategy Rubric: 1-Strategy is appropriate and student comprehension is high; 2-Strategy is appropriate,
student comprehension is average; 3-Strategy is partially effective and student comprehension is below
average; 4-Minimal match between strategy and outcome
Course Course Outcome Rating Strategy to Achieve Outcome Rating
Outcome Strategy
CME 101 • Students apply knowledge of 1 Students must write a synopsis of each 2
mathematics, engineering, and Guest lecturer and describe the
science to obtain an understanding technological advances that are still to
of the challenges of different fields be made in his field.
in the chemical engineering Students must be able to apply their
profession. knowledge of mathematics and science
to evaluate the claims of the speaker.
CME 304 • Utilize 1st & 2nd Laws of 1 Lectures, reading assignments, problem 2
Thermodynamics solving, recitations, homework,
• Evaluate PVT properties, EOS, quizzes, lecture notes
phase equilibria
• Evaluate heat effect and chemical
effects for industrial processes
CME 310 • Use chemistry and physics laws 1 In-class discussion of engineering 1
to analyze chemical engineering problems with emphasis on
problems understanding underlying scientific
• Use mathematical tools to principles. Writing assignments.
model chemical engineering Use of engineering software in class.
problems Use of visual materials in class.
CME 312 • Students learn relationship 1 Elementary principles of chemical 2
between knowledge of chemistry, processes are reviewed.
math and physics and fundamental
engineering calculations. Basic engineering calculations as they
• Students learn the concept of relate to mass and energy are reviewed
mass and energy as they relate to and introduced.
chemical processes.
• Students learn processes and
process variables in the context of
mass and energy.
CME 314 • Understand models for VLE 1 Lectures, recitations, reading 2
behavior assignments, quizzes, midterm,
• Analysis of steady state flow homework, final exam, class
processes attendance, lecture notes
• Evaluate steam power plants
• Evaluate Carnot refrigerators,
vapor compression
• Evaluate heat pumps and
liquefaction processes
• Evaluate internal combustion jet
engines, rocket engines
CME 315 • Use knowledge of engineering 1 Perform four simulated experiments 1
mathematics in simulating process where they apply equations to predict
and design outcomes of simulated experiments in
heat exchange, gas absorbency, batch
36
reactors and mass transfer
CME 318 • Conversion of units; perform 1 Illustrative problems in class; reading 3
dimensional analysis; formation of and homework assignments
dimensionless groups; writing
material and energy balances;
reading and interpreting graphs and
charts to determine constants for
equations; how to evaluate
derivatives and integrals (calculus).
CME 320 • Use chemistry and physics 1 In-class analysis and planning of the 1
laws to analyze and solve chemical experiments. Homework: calculation of
engineering problems experimental parameters statistical
• Use mathematical tools to analysis of the results.
obtain numerical solution of
chemical engineering problems
CME 322 • Define and calculate heat flux 1 Mathematica is introduced 1
due to conduction, convection and Lecture, in-class example problems,
radiation exchange homework assignments are all used.
• Define the conservation of
energy law to solve heat transfer
problems.
• Solve numerical and differential
equations for heat transfer
problems
• Calculate the thermal resistance
for heat transfer
• Derive heat equation with
different spatial coordinates
• Generate time or spatial
dependence of a temperature
distribution
• Define and calculate quantities
used for mass-diffusion problems
• Calculate mass and molar
diffusive fluxes
• Derive mass diffusion equation
with different spatial coordinates
• Solve numerical and differential
equations for mass transfer
problems using Mathematica
• Generate time or spatial
dependence of a mass
(concentration) distribution
CME 323 • Use of thermodynamics 2 Lectures. Illustrative problems in class 2
with students’ participation.
• Solve integrals and differential Homework assignments and
equations in order to analyze corrections with students’ participation
kinetics data. in class.
Midterm; Final exam.
CME 401 • Use of material and energy 2 Lectures. Illustrative problems in class 2
balances with students’ participation.
• Apply equations and numerical Homework assignments and
methods with appropriate system corrections with students’ participation
units in class.
• Consider thermodynamics and Midterm; Final exam.
transport properties.
CME 402 • Work with dimensions and units 1 Illustrative problems in class; reading 2
and homework assignments
37
in SI, AE and CGS Systems;
writing material and energy
balances; define, calculate and
estimate properties of process
materials; utilize degree of
freedom analysis to determine
degree of specification of a system;
perform P-v-T calculations;
perform VLE calculations;
generate P-x-y and T-x-y
diagrams; solving systems of linear
equations simultaneously.
CME 410 • Students research a topic for 1 Students write thesis proposal and 1
their senior thesis and discuss discuss in detail specific problems in
chemical engineering problems in chemical engineering
detail
CME 440 • Application of basic principles of 1 Students select a chemical engineering 1
math, science and engineering that process. The process is divided into
govern commercial chemical two components: 1) Process and 2)
engineering processes. Design.
1) The process part utilizes knowledge
of science and math and 2) the design
utilizes the engineering component.
CME 441 • Applicability of math, science 2 Modify process flow sheet with 1
and engineering to innovative additional components.
process design.
38
Table B3.2.2 Producing Outcome B
Ability to design and conduct experiments as well as to analyze and interpret data
Outcome Rubric: 1-Course outcome completely meets ABET outcome; 2-Course outcome meets the
majority of the ABET outcome; 3-Course outcome only meets a part of the ABET outcome; 4-Mimimal
match between course and ABET outcome
Strategy Rubric: 1-Strategy is appropriate and student comprehension is high; 2-Strategy is appropriate,
student comprehension is average; 3-Strategy is partially effective and student comprehension is below
average; 4-Minimal match between strategy and outcome
Course Course Outcome Rating Strategy to Achieve Outcome Rating
Outcome Strategy
CME 304 • Discussion of thermodynamic 3 Use of and interpretation of 1
tables thermodynamic tables
• Understand experimental basis of Lecture on history of
Laws of Thermodynamics thermodynamic experiments used to
• Understand how thermodynamic determine thermodynamic basis for
properties are determined behavior of matter
Discussion of measurements of heat
capacity, expansion co-efficient,
enthalpy of fluids
CME 310 • Select an appropriate equipment 1 In-class hands-on experience with 1
and techniques for a given experiment hardware, tools and equipment. In-
• Assemble experimental setup class safety training.
• Assess reliability of setup Reading assignments: lab safety.
• Perform experiment safely Homework: design drawing.
• Evaluate experimental data using In-class: discussion of statistical
statistical software analysis, use of statistical software.
• Assess meaningfulness of a result Reading assignment: search for
and significance of experimental error published results. Homework:
calculation of theoretical and
• Analyze experiment outcome in
experimental results.
scope of available literature data
CME 312 • Students learn unit operation 2 The concept of unit operation is 2
calculations introduced as it relates to
• Students learn Mass and Energy understanding mass and energy
balance calculations and associated balance in a process.
data interpretation. Problem solving around unit
operations.
CME 314 • Students will be able to understand 1 Class discussion of how data is 2
how data is utilized to determine collected, potential for error, reading
thermodynamic properties of industrial of charts, interpolation of charts and
systems figures, calculation of errors in
• Students will gain an appreciation of charts, HW Quizzes & exams
the importance of experimental work Use of thermodynamic charts for
in the determination of thermodynamic determining properties of industrial
parameters involved in power fluids will be presented
production , internal combustion experimental measurements of
engines, jet engines refrigerators, and multi-component systems will be
VLE discussed
CME 315 • Analyze and interpret data 2 Teach students unit operation of 2
• Understand theory governing heat double-pipe heat exchanger, packed-
exchange, mass transfer, and column ammonia absorber, cooling
humidification. tower using Simulation software
• Scale-up issues using pilot plant interfaced with LABVIEW
data. (Simulation program developed at
Texas Tech University).
39
Teach batch synthesis and operation
using a Parr batch reactor.
CME 318 • Solving problems in fluid dynamics 2 Illustrative problems in class; 2
• Interpreting graphs and charts reading and homework assignments
• Graphical analysis of data
CME 320 • Research available techniques to 1 In-class discussion of projects. 1
meet project objectives Reading assignment: Literature
• Plan a sequence of experiments to search
assure desired outcome. Homework: design drawing
• Execute project timely and In-class: use of statistical software,
consistently discussion of experimental results
• Perform statistical error analysis Reading assignment: search for
• Assess meaningfulness of a result published results.
and significance of experimental error Homework: calculation of
• Check result and correct errors on theoretical and experimental results
all stages of a project
• Analyze experiment outcome in
scope of available literature data
CME 322 • Utilize conservation of energy law to 2 Lecture, in-class example problems, 2
solve steady-state and transit-state heat homework assignments.
transfer problems.
• Utilize Fick’s Law to solve steady-
state and transit-state mass diffusion
problems
• Solve numerical and differential
equations with initial and boundary
conditions for mass and heat transfer
problems
• Generate a graph for results
CME 323 • Kinetics is used for reactor design 2 Lectures. Class discussions 2
considering specific chemical Data analysis
reactions Illustrative problems in class with
students’ participation.
• Analysis of kinetics parameters and Homework assignments and
interpretation of results in order to corrections with students’
choose the appropriate reactor. participation in class
CME 401 • Design of adequate separation 2 Lectures. 2
operations depending on product Illustrative problems in class with
requirements with specific students’ participation.
considerations: purity, molecular Homework assignments and
properties, thermodynamic and corrections with students’
transport properties, safety and cost. participation in class.
Midterm; Final exam
CME 402 • Design is emphasized by selection 1 Illustrative problems in class; 1
of efficient separation through reading and homework assignments
examining equipment parameters via IN ADDITION to student
material balances, use of design presentation of design project(s) to
equations, safety, regulatory and industrial experts for technical
economic considerations. review and discussion.
CME 410 1 1
CME 420 • Students learn to design and 1 Specifically design and conduct new 3
conduct new experiments. experiments for the chosen project.
• The conclusions are reached by Collect and interpret data.
collected and then data interpretation.
40
Table B3.2.3 Producing Outcome C
Ability to design a system, component or process to meet desired needs within realistic
constraints such as economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health and safety,
manufacturability and sustainability.
Outcome Rubric: 1-Course outcome completely meets ABET outcome; 2-Course outcome meets the
majority of the ABET outcome; 3-Course outcome only meets a part of the ABET outcome; 4-Mimimal
match between course and ABET outcome
Strategy Rubric: 1-Strategy is appropriate and student comprehension is high; 2-Strategy is appropriate,
student comprehension is average; 3-Strategy is partially effective and student comprehension is below
average; 4-Minimal match between strategy and outcome
Course Course Outcome Rating Strategy to Achieve Outcome Rating
Outcome Strategy
CME 304 • Ability to analyze thermodynamic 1 Homework, examples, lectures 1
process and its capability and and recitation
efficiency
CME 310 • Apply material and energy balance 2 In-class: use of design and 2
concepts to devise general layout of a engineering software.
system Homework: Estimate constraints of
• Use chemical engineering software a unit
to design a unit operation for
chemical process
• Estimate realistic constraints of a
unit
CME 312 • Students learn process as composed 1 Teach fundamental engineering 3
of a series of individual unit calculations and the use of
components. terminology such as Reynolds
• Students learn various types of unit number, Prandtl number, laminar
operations. and turbulent fluid flow.
• Students can then design a system
with features that comply with state Teach unit operation: batch and
and federal safety, health and continuous modes. Pilot plant
environmental regulations. characteristics.
• Students learn the importance of
incorporation of Green Chemistry in a
process as a necessary element for
sustainability.
CME 314 • Student will be able to design a 2 Students will be given design 2
thermodynamic system using design requirements for operating engines,
requirements as a starting point refrigerator, heat pump and asked to
design a device that meets the given
• Student will be able to evaluate requirements
different designs to determine Lectures on design , HW and
optimum design quizzes will be used to evaluate
student designs
Students will be allowed to form
into small groups of 2-4 to work
together to submit appropriate
designs
CME 315 • Students learn how to integrate 1 Use experiments cluster that embeds 1
Process Management and Control fundamentals of traditional unit
(PMC) framework to efficiently operation at the pilot plant scale.
operate a pilot plant
CME 318 • Design is discussed in terms of unit 1 Illustrative problems in class; 2
operations and students learn different reading and homework assignments
41
phases of the design process Students choose a specific design
relevant to fluid dynamics and
submit a paper
CME 320 • Apply material and energy balance 1 In-class: use of design and 2
concepts to devise general layout of a engineering software. Reading
system assignment: search of known system
• Use chemical engineering software designs and processes. Homework:
to design a unit operation for Estimate constraints of a unit
chemical process
• Calculate realistic constraints of a
unit
CME 322 • Design a heat exchanger based on 2 Lecture, in-class example problems, 4
performance parameters for assessing homework assignments
the efficacy of a heat exchanger
• Design an installation of a extended
surface to enhance heat transfer
CME 323 • Rational design and analysis of 2 Lectures. 3
performance of chemical reactors Class discussions
• Considerations of type, size, Illustrative problems in class with
configuration, cost and operating students’ participation.
operations of the device
CME 401 • Students design separation systems: 2 Students select a system of 2
Learn difference between input separation and explain its process
parameters and output for different
systems.
CME 402 • Design is integral to this course, as 1 Illustrative problems in class; 2
students define a separations project, reading and homework assignments
work through the details, and present Students give oral presentations of
all the information to justify their design projects
choice to a technical audience of
industry experts.
CME 410 • Students present thesis research 1 Students submit written proposals 1
proposal where they discuss the Students defend proposal in oral
process, systems to be designed, cost presentation to committee
analysis, safety and hazard
considerations
• Student begin preliminary
experiments
CME 440 • Learn how to identify components 1 Identify process type and its 1
for incorporation into a commercial applications.
process. Identify process needs for potential
improvements
CME 441 • A workable system with compatible 1 Identify process components that 1
components is designed. meet ASTM specifications.
• Maintain Quality control.
42
Table B3.2.4 Producing Outcome D
Ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams
Outcome Rubric: 1-Course outcome completely meets ABET outcome; 2-Course outcome meets the
majority of the ABET outcome; 3-Course outcome only meets a part of the ABET outcome; 4-Mimimal
match between course and ABET outcome
Strategy Rubric: 1-Strategy is appropriate and student comprehension is high; 2-Strategy is appropriate,
student comprehension is average; 3-Strategy is partially effective and student comprehension is below
average; 4-Minimal match between strategy and outcome
Course Course Outcome Rating Strategy to Achieve Outcome Rating
Outcome Strategy
CME 101 • Learn to communicate effectively in 2 Students give oral presentations 1
an interdisciplinary environment describing their choice of
specialization.
CME 310 • Develop and carry out a project 1 Students are divided in groups and 2
plan through accepting and work in-class and out of class as a
delegating roles and responsibilities team
in the team to fulfill project
requirements
• Interact with team members on
decision making and discussion of
results
CME 312 • Students understand the importance 1 In-class interaction and joint 3
of interdisciplinary teamwork in discussions are encouraged to work
modern day problem-solving approach together.
in industrial settings.
CME 315 • Students learn to work in 1 Students work in teams to operate a 2
multidisciplinary teams but pilot plant using process simulation
individually analyze and interpret the software.
collected data.
CME 320 • Develop and carry out a project 1 Students are divided in groups and 2
plan through accepting and work in-class and out of class as a
delegating roles and responsibilities team
in the team to fulfill project
requirements
• Interact with team members on
decision making and discussion of
results
CME 410 • Students may work in teams but 1 Students detail the contributions of 1
must identify the original contribution each participant and defend the need
of each participant for teamwork to the committee
CME 420 • Students work with other team 2 Choose a new topic of immense 2
members to collect industrial interest that does not have
• Data on specialized units. too much background information.
Define teams to get useful data
within the time constraint of the
semester.
CME 440 • Learn how to work in a team. 2 Students work in a group of 2 or 3 1
• Learn how to share credit in and divide project tasks.
teamwork
CME 441 • Students learn how to refine ideas by 2 Teams are asked to identify 1
seeking input from other team innovation.
members.
43
Table B3.2.5 Producing Outcome E
Ability to identify, formulate, and solve engineering problems
Outcome Rubric: 1-Course outcome completely meets ABET outcome; 2-Course outcome meets the
majority of the ABET outcome; 3-Course outcome only meets a part of the ABET outcome; 4-Mimimal
match between course and ABET outcome
Strategy Rubric: 1-Strategy is appropriate and student comprehension is high; 2-Strategy is appropriate,
student comprehension is average; 3-Strategy is partially effective and student comprehension is below
average; 4-Minimal match between strategy and outcome
Course Course Outcome Rating Strategy to Achieve Outcome Rating
Outcome Strategy
CME 304 • Understand how to reformulate verbal 1 Lectures on how to analyze a process 1
problems to and translate it into a quantitative
quantitative statements statement
CME 310 • Choose a mathematical or other 2 In-class: use of engineering software. 2
suitable model of an engineering Homework: perform simple
problem calculations
• Use the model to interpret results
and change parameters of a process.
CME 312 • Students learn the complexity of 1 Fundamentals of mass and energy 2
existing chemical processes and then balance require understanding
learn to simplify process components existing chemical processes and their
by dividing into a subset of individual limitations.
unit operation. Place process system constraints to
• Students formulate strategies to learn process limits.
minimize process operation disruptions. Understand plant troubleshooting.
CME 314 • Students will be able to interpret 2 Class discussion,, lecture Notes, 2
engineering problems and formulate an Quizzes, Homeworks, recitation
appropriate solution sections
• Students will learn to recognize
different types of
thermodynamics problems and the
appropriate approach to finding a
solution
CME 315 • Solve a variety of numerical 1 Lecture, in-class example problems, 1
equations (e.g., polynomial equations homework assignments
and differential equations) and
numerical calculus (e.g., integration,
differentiation) using a computer based
program
CME 318 • Students recognize and/or define an 1 Illustrative problems in class; reading 2
engineering problem within the context and homework assignments
of fluid mechanics; analyze given Student select design projects
information to find unknowns or
equations using models, flow chart,
diagrams, etc.
CME 320 • Develop a mathematical or other 1 In-class: use of engineering software. 1
suitable model of an engineering Homework: perform calculations
problem
• Use the model to interpret results,
predict outcome and change parameters
of a process.
CME 322 • Identify heat transfer due to 1 Lecture, in-class example problems, 2
conduction, convection and radiation homework assignments
exchange)
44
• Formulate the conservation of
energy law to solve specific problems
for mass and heat transfer
• Identify differences between
thermodynamics and heat transfer
• Identify correspondence between
mass and heat transfer
• Perform numerical calculations
using Mathematica
CME 323 • Considerations of chemical reactions 2 Lectures. Data analysis 3
• Identification of the critical factors Illustrative problems in class with
• Evaluation of a reactor in order to students’ participation.
obtain the required product. Homework assignments and
corrections with students’
participation in class.
Midterm; Final exam.
CME 401 • Students learn to analyze process and 1 Illustrative problems and examples in 2
determine appropriate separation class
processes Homework problems; midterm; final
CME 402 • Students recognize and/or define an 1 Illustrative problems in class; 1
engineering reading and homework
problem within the context of assignments
separations; analyze Students select specific separation
given information to find unknowns or processes and research application
equations using to specific situation
models, flow chart, diagrams, etc.
CME 440 • Students learn to identify process 1 Understand the basic concepts of 1
components and design. process design, process components
• Any process shortcomings are identification to address changes in
identified for further modifications. process design.
CME 441 • Understanding of existing process 1 The shortcomings of the process are 1
limitations. identified.
• Identification of various possible
solutions.
• Selection of the best possible solution
based on design consideration and
economics.
45
Table B3.2.6 Producing Outcome F
Understanding of professional and ethical responsibility
Outcome Rubric: 1-Course outcome completely meets ABET outcome; 2-Course outcome meets the
majority of the ABET outcome; 3-Course outcome only meets a part of the ABET outcome; 4-Mimimal
match between course and ABET outcome
Strategy Rubric: 1-Strategy is appropriate and student comprehension is high; 2-Strategy is appropriate,
student comprehension is average; 3-Strategy is partially effective and student comprehension is below
average; 4-Minimal match between strategy and outcome
Course Course Outcome Rating Strategy to Achieve Outcome Rating
Outcome Strategy
CME 101 • Students discuss potential ethical 2 Address potential ethical problems 2
dilemmas in chemical engineering with chosen CME field in term paper
related disciplines Students insert at least two outside
• Class discussion on assigning proper references in weekly write-ups and
credit for material taken from outside term paper
sources
CME 304 2 2
CME 310 2 2
CME 312 • Students learn to value work of other 1 All homework is checked for 3
professionals. copying from fellow students.
• Students design processes with built- Impress on students not to
in safety and health protection features compromise process improvements
and minimum environmental impact. to save cost at the expense of
environmental, health and safety.
CME 314 • Students will learn the importance of 2 Lectures on ethical behavior with 2
ethical responsibility in and regards to collaboration on HWs,
engineering environment exams, etc.
Discussion of penalties associated
with unethical behavior and
professional loss of prestige
CME 315 • Data analysis is distinct from the 1 Conduct simulation experiments with 2
teammate a teammate but provide own
interpretation.
CME 318 • Students asked to discuss selection 1 Illustrative problems in class; reading 4
of particular project while optimally and homework assignments IN
balancing cost, utility and risk ADDITION to student presentations
assessment.
CME 320 • Students learn ethical consideration 1 Students provide proper reference to 2
of credit assessment in team projects team members and literature in lab
reports for oral presentation
CME 322 • Students learn to balance ethics in 2 Student analyze cost/safety balance 2
weighing cost versus safety in design in design reports and presentations
CME 323 • Assessment of the reactor efficacy for 4 Lectures; Data analysis; Illustrative 4
a specific chemical reaction problems in class with students’
• Safety and environmental participation.
considerations Homework assignments and
corrections with students’
participation in class. Midterm; Final
exam.
CME 401 • Analyzing the safety risks versus cost 2 Write manuals in a responsible 2
of operations, ethics of disclosure manner
Discuss risks versus safety
assessments in oral presentations
CME 402 • Students asked to discuss selection of 1 Illustrative problems in class; reading 1
46
particular project while optimally and homework assignments IN
balancing cost, utility and risk ADDITION to student presentations
assessment
CME 410 • Students research a topic for their 2 Students write thesis proposal and 3
senior thesis and discuss chemical discuss in detail specific problems in
engineering problems in detail chemical engineering
CME 420 • Students learn to appropriately 1 Students are asked to thoroughly 2
reference all materials used in their collect and reference all background
final thesis report. information on the project subject
matter.
CME 440 • A professional report that respects 2 All process related materials are 2
copyright laws and rules governing ethically referenced to give proper
published information. credit to the source of the
information.
CME 441 • The suggested improvements are 1 Selected process and the 1
professionally and ethically developed accompanying flowsheet are
with proper credit given to all the developed by the team, not a
sources, not a reworded statements with modified version of others’ work
only partial or no input by the design taken from the Internet or other
team. sources.
47
Table B3.2.7 Producing Outcome G
Ability to communicate effectively
Outcome Rubric: 1-Course outcome completely meets ABET outcome; 2-Course outcome meets the
majority of the ABET outcome; 3-Course outcome only meets a part of the ABET outcome; 4-Mimimal
match between course and ABET outcome
Strategy Rubric: 1-Strategy is appropriate and student comprehension is high; 2-Strategy is appropriate,
student comprehension is average; 3-Strategy is partially effective and student comprehension is below
average; 4-Minimal match between strategy and outcome
Course Course Outcome Rating Strategy to Achieve Outcome Rating
Outcome Strategy
CME 101 • Students learn to communicate their 2 Students listen to seminars given 3
ideas to by invited speakers and participate
chemical engineering professionals by asking questions and giving
their impressions in writing
CME 310 • Present results and suggestions in 1 In-class: presentation of 1
factual and suitable way for specific experimental results and
audience discussion. Written report
• Prepare written reports for non-
technical and technical audiences
CME 318 • Oral presentations and written 1 Students present design projects in 2
reports oral presentations
• Mock job interviews Prepare resumes and undergo
mock job interviews
CME 320 • Present results and suggestions in 1 In-class: team project presentation 2
factual and suitable way for specific and discussion. Written report
audience
• Prepare written reports for non-
technical and technical audiences
CME 322 • Oral presentations and short written 2 Students select design projects to 2
reports present orally
Students submit short design
project reports
CME 401 • Oral presentations and projects 2 Students select a project for oral 2
presentation
CME 402 • Oral presentation of research project 2 Students research the application 2
• Term paper on separation process of a separation process, write a
term paper and present it orally
CME 410 • Students develop effective oral and 1 Students submit research proposal 1
written skills Students defend proposal in oral
presentation
CME 420 • Students learn to present their results 1 Both oral presentations and written 1
and conclusions reports are required
to their peers and others
• Students learn to write a concise and
clear report
CME 440 • Learn how to lead a team by being an 1 This Part I of the two-part design 1
effective project demands effective
communicator as well as a good communication among the team
speaker to give members as well as during the final
presentations presentation
48
Table B3.2.8 Producing Outcome H
Broad education necessary to understand the impact of engineering solutions in a global,
economic, environmental, and societal context.
Outcome Rubric: 1-Course outcome completely meets ABET outcome; 2-Course outcome meets the
majority of the ABET outcome; 3-Course outcome only meets a part of the ABET outcome; 4-Mimimal
match between course and ABET outcome
Strategy Rubric: 1-Strategy is appropriate and student comprehension is high; 2-Strategy is appropriate,
student comprehension is average; 3-Strategy is partially effective and student comprehension is below
average; 4-Minimal match between strategy and outcome
Course Course Outcome Rating Strategy to Achieve Outcome Rating
Outcome Strategy
CME 101 • Understand the amount of 1 Students are required to ask each 2
education needed to attain chosen speaker how much education is
objective needed to perform his job
CME 304 2 3
CME 310 • Students learn real world 1 Discuss applications in lab report 2
application of experiments
CME 312 • Students learn to appreciate the 1 Use processes as examples that meet 3
balance between societal needs but focus on
company’s bottom line (income) and environment, safety, and health
addressing protecting the issues and their economic cost.
environment and the society.
CME 314 • Student will gain an appreciation of 1 Use of lectures, discussion groups, 2
the importance of thermodynamics to invited speakers
other professional studies in
chemical engineering
• Student will develop an
appreciation of the importance of
thermodynamics to other general
fields such sustainable energy, global
warming, biology, human history
CME 315 • Students learn the importance of 1 The use of simulation hardware 2
broad education clearly demonstrates the changing
when acquiring a working knowledge chemical engineering profession. A
of process working knowledge of computers is
control and operation using computer necessary to operate the software
software
CME 318 • Students learn real world 2 Students research a particular 2
applications of fluid application for their term paper
Mechanics principles
CME 320 2 3
CME 322 • Learn to apply the process of 2 Lecture, reading assignments, in- 2
thermoregulation based on class example problems, homework
knowledge of heat transfer to real assignments
world situations Term paper and oral presentations
• Learn to apply the mechanism of
fuel cells as an alterative energy
device and the application to real
world situations
• Learn to apply the mechanism of
thermocouple based on heat transfer
and the application to real world
situations
• Learn to apply the concept of a
49
packed bed for thermal energy
storage and the application to real
world situations
• Learn to apply the mechanism of
drug delivery based on diffusion
mass transfer and the application to
real world situations
CME 323 • Knowledge of processes used in 1 Student present analysis of cost 2
industries with balance of cost versus versus environmental impact in oral
environmental issues presentation
CME 401 • Students discuss broad applications 1 Homework problems 2
of separation process to real world In-class discussions
situations Written reports
• Student analyze limitations and
effectiveness of process
• Students learn implications of
waste disposal and global ,
environmental and economic impact
CME 402 • Discussion of cost and the broader 2 Students research the application of a 1
environmental specific process and provide a
impact of different separation detailed analysis of the broader
technologies implications
• Discussion of waste and hazards Students consider long-term safety
effects regarding waste disposal and
safety
CME 410 • Students research a topic for their 1 Students write thesis proposal and 1
senior thesis and discuss chemical discuss in detail specific problems in
engineering problems in detail chemical engineering
CME 420 • Students broaden their knowledge 1 The selected research topic is 2
by working on projects that require a multidisciplinary
multidisciplinary approach.
• Students pride themselves of
working on problems
that are likely to impact the society
CME 440 • A broad knowledge of processes 1 Process selection requires 1
and industries that reviewing various chemical
employ chemical engineers engineering processes
• A knowledge of parts and
components that form a
commercial plant
CME 441 • Students are well informed of 1 Innovative solutions to improved 2
process improvement needs process needs requires assessing
• Learn the process to achieve the knowledge-based options
needs. Final report must consist of: process
• Learn to incorporate the process flowsheet, safety features, the unit
needs. operating manual, process control
• Learn to implement the process and economics
needs and the
economics
50
Table B3.2.9 Producing Outcome I
Recognition of the need for and an ability to engage in life-long learning
Outcome Rubric: 1-Course outcome completely meets ABET outcome; 2-Course outcome meets the
majority of the ABET outcome; 3-Course outcome only meets a part of the ABET outcome; 4-Mimimal
match between course and ABET outcome
Strategy Rubric: 1-Strategy is appropriate and student comprehension is high; 2-Strategy is appropriate,
student comprehension is average; 3-Strategy is partially effective and student comprehension is below
average; 4-Minimal match between strategy and outcome
Course Course Outcome Rating Strategy to Achieve Outcome Rating
Outcome Strategy
CME 101 • Understand the amount of education 1 Students are required to ask each 1
needed to attain chosen objective speaker how much education is
needed to perform his job
CME 304 1 2
CME 310 • Students learn to use databases for 2 Encouraged participation in 2
keeping current on research AIChE
development meetings
• Students are encouraged to obtain
student membership in professional
societies
CME 312 • Students learn to engage in lifelong 1 Discuss need and incorporation 3
learning by taking continuing education of new technological advances
courses from time to time, offered by to make process more energy
AIChE and others, to stay informed of efficient
the latest available technologies. Process design with respect to
materials and energy balance
requires constant process design
improvements to minimize
energy use
CME 314 2 1
CME 315 • Students learn the changing job 2 Learn commercial operation 1
description of chemical engineers who using
can operate commercial process units computer-based process control
remotely. This requires constant to operate a pilot unit.
updating of professional skills
CME 318 • Discuss relevance of graduate study 1 Students apply for membership 4
and membership in professional to society of their choice
societies to career goals Students enroll in FE course
• Discuss requirements for
professional licensure and patent
literature as well as how to obtain
patents
CME 320 • Students must obtain literature 2 Students submit research to 2
references on lab AIChE
experiments conferences and URECA
CME 322 • Encourage students about modern 1 Lecture, reading assignments, in- 2
applications related to subjects such as class example problems,
nanotechnology and alternative energy. homework assignments
CME 323 • Need to learn about new and 3 Lectures. Homework 4
improved processes used in industries assignments
considering environmental and safety
regulations, in order to design efficient
operating conditions
CME 401 • Discuss the need to keep current 2 Students conduct database 2
51
regarding new technologies in suggested search for reports and
separation processes. homeworks
CME 402 • Encourage students about graduate 1 Illustrative problems in class; 3
study, membership societies, reading and homework
professional licensure and patent assignments IN ADDITION to
literature as well as how to obtain student presentations
patents.
CME 410 • Students research a topic for their 2 Students write thesis proposal 3
senior thesis and discuss chemical and discuss in detail specific
engineering problems in detail problems in chemical
engineering
CME 420 • Students learn the changing job 2 Learn commercial operation 3
description of chemical engineers who using
can operate commercial process units computer-based process control
remotely. This requires constant to operate a pilot unit.
updating of professional skills
CME 440 • A need for constant process 1 Develop a detailed knowledge of 1
improvements to incorporate changing design and process components
federal, local, and environmental
regulations.
• Changing need of the industry and
product demand.
• Changing direction of the employer’s
product slate.
CME 441 • Meet the changing need of the 1 Implement the most cost- 1
product to stay competitive in the effective
global marketplace. improvements that meets the
• Incorporation of innovation to gain product specification as defined
competitive edge over the competition. by product ISO registration
52
Table B3.2.10 Producing Outcome J
Knowledge of contemporary issues
Outcome Rubric: 1-Course outcome completely meets ABET outcome; 2-Course outcome meets the
majority of the ABET outcome; 3-Course outcome only meets a part of the ABET outcome; 4-Mimimal
match between course and ABET outcome
Strategy Rubric: 1-Strategy is appropriate and student comprehension is high; 2-Strategy is appropriate,
student comprehension is average; 3-Strategy is partially effective and student comprehension is below
average; 4-Minimal match between strategy and outcome
Course Course Outcome Rating Strategy to Achieve Outcome Rating
Outcome Strategy
CME 101 • Students are aware of the contribution 1 The speakers are asked to address the 1
of chemical engineers to society. relevance of their work/research to
solving problems in the short and
long run.
CME 304 1 3
CME 310 • Application of skills to real world 1 Discuss applications in lab report 2
problems write-ups
CME 312 • Students are well versed in changing 1 Discuss process design and features 3
needs of our society and their in class that are necessary to address
relationship to chemical processes. changing societal needs.
CME 314 • Student will gain appreciation of 1 Discussion groups, essay writing, 2
importance of assigned readings on environmental
thermodynamics in relation to issues, global warming etc.
important questions of the day
CME 315 • Students learn to appreciate staying 1 Discuss any emerging issues in class 2
current on as they pertain to unit operation.
societal and other issues that can be
impacted through the chemical
engineering profession.
CME 318 • Students are made aware of ethical, 1 Illustrative class examples 4
safety and Discussion; Required literature
Regulatory issues in fluid system search as part of assignment
designs
CME 320 • Experiments are discussed in the 1 Students are required to perform 1
context of current research challenges literature search and discuss
contemporary context of experiments
CME 322 • Fuel cells as alternative energy 2 Lecture, in-class example problems, 4
devices homework assignments
CME 323 • Awareness and considerations of 3 Lectures. 4
regulations: safety and environmental Class discussions
issues.
CME 401 • Awareness and considerations of 2 Demonstrate awareness of these 2
regulations: issues in oral presentations
environmental and safety issues
emphasized in lectures
CME 402 • Ethics; safety and regulatory 1 Illustrative problems in class; reading 1
concerns; environmental and hazard and homework assignments IN
analysis. ADDITION to
student presentations
CME 410 • Students research a topic for their 1 Students write thesis proposal and 1
senior thesis and discuss chemical discuss in detail specific problems in
engineering problems in detail chemical engineering
53
CME 420 • Students learn to assess the impact of 2 Keep an updated literature of the 4
their discoveries on various regulations research problem and its relationship
and societal issues. to issues affecting our society.
CME 440 • Process improvements are identified 2 Existing process is measured against 2
to incorporate latest technologies and changing societal issues.
address societal issues such as
minimizing carbon footprint and waste
reduction in the process.
CME 441 • Students learn to incorporate any 1 Discuss in class any issue affecting 2
societal issues in their designs if our society.
relevant.
54
Table B3.2.11 Producing Outcome K
Ability to use techniques, skills, and tools necessary for engineering practice
Outcome Rubric: 1-Course outcome completely meets ABET outcome; 2-Course outcome meets the
majority of the ABET outcome; 3-Course outcome only meets a part of the ABET outcome; 4-Mimimal
match between course and ABET outcome
Strategy Rubric: 1-Strategy is appropriate and student comprehension is high; 2-Strategy is appropriate,
student comprehension is average; 3-Strategy is partially effective and student comprehension is below
average; 4-Minimal match between strategy and outcome
Course Course Outcome Rating Strategy to Achieve Outcome Rating
Outcome Strategy
CME 304 • Calculate PVT properties of fluids 2 Utilize iterative techniques to solve 2
cubic equations for volumetric
behavior of fluids
Utilize EXCEL as a tool for
solving volumetric properties
CME 310 • Acquire skills and knowledge of 1 In-class: use tools and develop 1
techniques and tools used in skill working on unit setup.
engineering practice Operate unit.
• Understand how to operate
equipment relevant to chemical
engineering systems
CME 312 • Students learn to construct a process 1 Teach fundamentals of mass and 3
flow sheet with all the necessary energy balance as they relate to
features according to published understanding unit operations for
standards (ASTM, OSHA, and others). various process types (non-
reactive, reactive, etc.). Preparation
of detailed flow sheet with full
mass and energy balance.
Use Visio and Excel programs.
CME 314 • Student will be able to relate 1 Lectures, discussion of engineering 3
thermodynamic skills needed to be successful in
Knowledge to engineering manufacture or process
requirements for engines, power engineering for chemical
plants, VLE, refrigerators, engineers.
compressors, expanders etc. Use of specific industrial examples
to apply engineering skills and
techniques
Discussion of lab techniques for
process engineering
CME 315 • Learn process control through process 1 Use the latest simulation software 1
simulation computing technique. to conduct unit operation and
• Students learn scale-up issues. process control.
CME 320 • Enhance skills and knowledge of 1 In-class: use tools and develop 1
techniques and tools used in skill working on unit setup. Use
engineering practice advanced techniques available in
• Operate advanced equipment research lab.
relevant to chemical engineering
systems
CME 322 • Design of a heat exchanger based on 1 Lecture, in-class example 2
performance parameters for assessing problems,
the efficacy of a heat exchanger homework assignments
• Design of a coating process on a plate Short papers or design projects
by expose to an infrared lump. Oral presentations of one design
• Design of a microchip in a substrate project
55
to maintain a desired temperature
• Design of turbine blades mounted to a
rotating disc in turbine engine to
maintain a desired temperature
• Design of a composite wall of an
oven composed of multiple materials to
maintain desired temperatures
CME 323 • Knowledge of different types of 3 Lectures; Data analysis 4
reactors and analysis tools Illustrative problems in class with
students’ participation.
Homework assignments and
corrections with students’
participation in class.
Midterm; Final exam
CME 401 • Knowledge of separation techniques 2 Lectures. Illustrative problems in 2
and analysis tools as well as separation class with students’ participation.
simulations Homework assignments and
corrections with students’
participation in class. Midterm;
Final exam
CME 402 • Technical skills in chemical 1 Illustrative problems in class; 1
engineering project development; reading and homework
technical knowledge in chemical assignments IN ADDITION to
engineering reactions and processes, student presentations
computer
simulations; work effectively as a team;
communicate effectively; gather
information
independent learning and analyze
information
CME 410 • Students propose original research 2 Students submit research proposal 2
projects Students defend proposal in oral
• Students perform preliminary presentation
calculations
CME 440 • Understand and steps for batch, semi- 1 Understand all process and design 1
continuous and pilot units. steps leading
• Design process improvements and to the chosen commercial process
their incorporation in a flow sheet
CME 441 • Learn to create process flow sheets 1 Use computing program 1
that meet the industry standard. (spreadsheet and VISIO) to
• Understand OSHA regulations and construct the flow sheet.
standards. Use engineering safety standards
• Learn to develop a standard operating and workplace safety and
procedure for a commercial plant. incorporate in the flow sheet.
Create a Safety manual
56
3.3 Summary of outcome ratings
The mean rating for the outcomes of the overall program and the ABET outcomes is 1.5, or the
course design is a good-excellent match with the ABET 3 a-k. The individual outcome ratings
are plotted in the Figure B3.2. From the figure we see that the program provides the best match
for outcome a, which reflects the strong emphasis by the UPC on mastering the fundamental
prerequisites (chemistry, math, and physics). This was achieved by continuous cycles within the
internal loop where the UPC met with the undergraduate program directors in the College of
Liberal Arts and Sciences to ensure that the foundation courses they offered met the strict
requirements of our program. Outcomes e also scored highly, since effective problem solving is
based on well grounded fundamental knowledge of basic engineering principals. We were also
pleased to see that the curriculum also scored highly in outcome g, which was strongly
emphasized as a crucial parameter for success after graduation by the industrial advisory
committee.
The highest score, 1.69, was for outcome f. This also correlates with the fact that this
outcome is also allocated the smallest amount of credit hours in the program. Even though this
rating is still qualified as “good,” we are working on improving our ability to incorporate this
outcome more effectively into the curriculum. The UPC, together with the external advisory
committee, is currently discussing the advisability of offering a separate course which addresses
ethics and moral responsibility in chemical engineering.
Figure B3.2 Course outcome relationships to ABET 3a-k
Outcome Ratings
4.00
3.50
Ratings 1-4, 1=excellent
3.00
2.50
2.00 1.69
1.62 1.50 1.56
1.36 1.40 1.31 1.38 1.38
1.50 1.20 1.23
1.00
0.50
0.00
a b c d e f g h i j k
Outcomes a-k
The ratings of the ability of the strategies to communicate the materials to the students
are summarized for each of the outcomes 3a-k in Figure B3.3. The average for the
program in this case is 1.89 or good. Here too, the best ratings were obtained for the
quantitative outcomes a, k, and e, which indicated that the strategies used to teach
engineering fundamentals to the students were also very effective and that the students
57
demonstrated a high level of mastery in their problem solving skills. The students also
performed very well in outcome d, or the ability to be productive in a team setting, which
was singled out by the EAB as one of the most important skills succeeding in the job
market.
The students’ performance and the ability of the strategies to communicate the material
were less than optimal for outcomes j, i, and f. This illustrates the problems in measuring
outcomes which are more qualitative in nature. Outcome f is being addressed, as
discussed previously, possibly by introducing a course where the students will be
presented with actual problems where their performance can be measured more
objectively. I and J are being addressed by placing more emphasis in encouraging
students to join national engineering associations such as AIChE and attending their
regional meetings, where they are exposed to recent developments in chemical
engineering research and where they can present their own work. The attendance and
participation will be improved once we obtain membership status for our CME Club this
year. Further emphasis on knowledge of contemporary issues will be incorporated in all
courses and in particular in CME 410, where the students are asked to write their thesis
proposal and will be graded on their ability to place their research within a broader global
context.
Figure B3.3 Ratings of student performance in ABET objectives 3a-k
Strategy Ratings
4.00
3.50
Ratings 1-4, 1= excellent
3.00
2.38
2.50 2.25 2.19
1.93 2.00
2.00 1.85
1.60 1.69 1.63 1.62 1.70
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
a b c d e f g h i j k
Outcomes a-k
3.4 Relation of Program Outcomes to Educational Objectives
The educational program is designed to provide the graduating students with the skills to
address the program outcomes. These in turn should lead to accomplishments of the
graduates that are consistent with the program objectives. Hence it is useful to know how
the program outcomes are specifically related to the program objectives. Furthermore,
once we correlate the outcomes to the objectives we can then evaluate the distribution of
58
effort across the curriculum allocated for each objective. Later, when we evaluate the
accomplishments of our graduates in view of our program objectives, we will be able to
get a better feel of the relationship between course effort and post graduate achievement.
This data will be processed through the second, slower loop and be one of the program
evaluation criteria.
The relationship between the four PEOs and the program outcomes are summarized in
Table B3.3.
Table B3.3 Relationship between PEOs and Outcomes
PEO 1 PEO 2 PEO 3 PEO 4
a. Ability to apply knowledge of math, X X X X
engineering, and science
b. Ability to design and conduct experiments as X X
well as analyze and interpret data
c. Ability to design system, component or process X X
to meet needs
d. Ability to function on multi-disciplinary teams X X
e. Ability to identify, formulate, and solve X X
engineering problems
f. Understanding of professional and ethical X X X
responsibility
g. Ability to communicate effectively X X X X
h. Broad education X X X X
i. Recognition of need an ability to engage in life- X X X
long learning
j. Knowledge of contemporary issues X X X
k. Ability to use techniques, skills, and tools in X X
engineering practice
From the table we can see qualitatively see that the distribution of effort afforded to the
outcomes is such that it ultimately provides a balanced distribution of focus among the
four objectives. This can also be quantified, by using Table B3.3 above, where the
percent time allocations in the courses are tabulated. A plot of the credit effort spent on
preparing the students for ultimately achieving our program objectives is tabulated in
Figure B3.4 below. Here we can see that the effort is fairly uniformly distributed, thereby
ensuring that the adequate tools were at least presented to the students to allow them to
function in the workplace in a manner consistent with our program objectives. A
definitive evaluation will then take place in the next three years as we will poll our
graduates, their employers, and graduate program directors. The exposition of our course
materials in this manner will then allow us to easily make any adjustments as needed.
59
Figure B3.4 Effort distribution to achieve program objectives within the curriculum
Combined hours spent on PEOs
800
676
700
600
500 451 426
Hours
397
400
300
200
100
0
PEO1 PEO2 PEO3 PEO4
Program educational objectives
Figure B3.5 Outcome Ratings per PEO
Outcome Ratings per PEO
4.00
3.50
3.00
Average ratings
2.50
2.00
1.41 1.41 1.42 1.40
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
PEO1 PEO2 PEO3 PEO4
PEOs
60
Figure B3.6 Strategy Ratings per PEO
Strategy Ratings per PEO
4.00
3.50
3.00
Average ratings
2.50
1.92 1.93 2.02
2.00 1.80
1.50
1.00
0.50
0.00
PEO1 PEO2 PEO3 PEO4
PEOs
In Figure B3.5 we plot the self evaluation of our curriculum to meet the program
objectives. This evaluation is based on the relationship between the courses and the
ABET outcomes and our PEOs. From the figure we see that the program as a whole
scores better than 1.5 for the strategies built into the curriculum to achieve each of the
ABET 3a-k outcomes. This indicates that on average the curriculum design provides a
very good vehicle for achieving the PEOs. In Figure B3.6 the evaluation of the strategies
used and the ability of the students to achieve each of the PEOs obtained a score around 2
or “good” for each of the outcomes, i.e. was uniformly distributed across the curriculum.
Hence, even though different amounts of time were spent in the curriculum on achieving
the individual PEOs, the distribution was appropriate. As we continuously evaluate the
curriculum we hope to continuously improve out strategies so that the student
understanding score will match that for the curriculum content.
The PEOs will also be evaluated using a separate set of external metrics, as described
previously and in the next sections, based on alumni and employer surveys. These will be
compared with our self evaluation and will allow us to obtain a more realistic perspective
of our program.
61
4. Assessment and Evaluation of the Program
Figure B4.1 Interconnected loop structures for evaluating the program in Chemical
and Molecular Engineering
Figure B4.1 describes the process we use to continuously evaluate the program and
perform any adjustments that are needed which would allow us to improve our ability to
accomplish our mission. The evaluation process basically consists of two loops that are
interconnected. Loop 1 defines a set of measurable criteria and the associated tools for
quantitatively evaluating whether the curriculum as a whole is preparing the students to
achieve the program outcomes defined within ABET criterion 3. The loop continually
probes and adjusts the curriculum with a final evaluation upon graduation. In this manner
a specific chain of events is set in motion which, we demonstrate, can address
deficiencies and continuously improve the program, with a response time on the order of
days or weeks. The frequency with which we activate this portion of the loop is probably
much higher than other more established programs. But we feel that since the program is
new, we have the liberty to be more flexible and even predict potential problems and
62
correct them even before they occur.
Another reason for the frequent evaluation process is the close relationship between the
program outcomes and the program objectives. The second loop is designed to test the
ability of the program to meet the four educational objectives (PEOs) defined within its
mission. This loop is performance based, and the evaluation process relies on feedback
from an extensive set of surveys from graduates of the program and their post graduate
supervisors - either in professional or graduate schools - and in the workplace.
Completion of this loop requires at least one year and eventually up to five years. The
success of this loop is intimately connected to the perception of our graduates in a
regional or global context and feeds into the ability of our program to attract more
students and place our graduates in internships and jobs.
Since the program is very new, the data we obtained in activating this loop is limited. On
the other hand, the results are critical to the program, and we want to make every effort to
assure a favorable outcome within the next few years as our number of graduates increase
and diversify. Since this loop is interrelated with the first loop via the relationship
between the program outcomes and the objectives, frequent activation of Loop 1 and
continuous improvement also impact Loop 2 and our confidence in its future outcomes.
4.1 Loop 1 Continuous Performance Evaluation
The focus of this loop is the design of a robust process which ensures the improvement of
the program based on the quantitative evaluation of the outcomes. The first part of the
process is the definition of a set of criteria for defining the success of the program. These
are listed in section 4.1.1. The second part involves the definition of the set of tools
which are used to assign a grade to each of the criteria. The tools and the rubric used for
grading with each one are described in section 4.1.2. Complete survey forms, minutes,
and other supplementary materials used to collect data are in the Appendix. Here we will
only provide the results of the analysis. The data collected using the listed tools is then
presented to the Data Collection and Analysis Committee (DCAC), where it is processed
to answer specific questions and provide quantitative answers. The results of the
evaluations are then presented to the Undergraduate Program Committee which then
deliberates, identifies deficiencies, and recommends appropriate actions to remedy them
to the program directors and the department chair. If needed, the corrections to the
program are then presented to the college ABET oversight committee and ultimately
approved by the CTPC committee.
4.1.1 Measurable Performance Criteria
(A) The ability of the course content to address the program outcomes and prepare the
students for meeting all four PEOs.
(B) The degree to which students are satisfied with the presentation of the course
materials, relevance of the contents to the workplace, method and pace of instruction, and
mentoring and advising.
(C) The performance of students and the degree to which they actually know and can put
into practice the material presented in the curriculum.
63
4.1.2 Definition of the Measurement Tools and Grading Rubric
Each set of criteria is measured by a set of internal and external tools. The internal tools
rely on data collected from internal constituents, i.e. program faculty and students. The
external tools rely on data collected from outside of the College of Engineering. The tools
are designed such that overlap exists between the questions raised in the internal and
external evaluations such that we can assess the degree of objectivity of the results.
4.1.3 Tools for determining course content
i. At the beginning of each semester the instructors are asked to assess the fraction of the
time spent in their course in achieving each of the outcomes a-k. The data is then
evaluated by the DCAC where it is converted into a fraction of the curriculum
credit/hours. Charts such as those illustrated in Section 3 are generated where the
percentage of credit/hour time spent in teaching related to each objective is tabulated.
Furthermore, these are then related to program objectives, and the overall focus spent on
each objective can be assessed. This data is then correlated to the student performance in
each of the areas, as defined in section iii below and to the outcomes of Loop 2. Should a
deficiency be perceived in the students’ performance, then the time distribution in that
area, relative to the overall curriculum, could be evaluated.
ii. Each semester the instructors of the courses are asked to complete the chart described
above, where they assess the relevance of the course content to each of the outcomes a-k
and they describe the system used to achieve these outcomes. The course evaluators, who
are experts in the course materials, then review these tables and assign a grade (from 1
through 4) to the ability of the system listed to accomplish its objective. The data from all
the course surveys is then collected by the DCAC which then assigns an overall grade for
each outcome to the program and an average grade from the combined grade for each
objective, as described previously and summarized below.
Grade Rubric:
1- Excellent - the system is an excellent illustration of all aspects of the outcome
2- Good - the system illustrates a majority, but not all of the facets of the outcome
3- Fair - the system is only peripherally related to the outcome
4- Poor - the system is inappropriate to achieving the outcome
iii. The curriculum is presented to the EAB at their annual visit and they are asked to
comment on its structure and overall ability to achieve outcomes a-k for the graduates
and ultimately allow the graduates to achieve the stated PEOs.
4.1.4 Tools for Measuring Student Satisfaction
i. Course evaluations are distributed to the students at the end of each semester, where
they are asked to rate the course content and delivery. The rating questionnaire is in the
appendix. The results for the 05-06 and the 06-07 semester are tabulated in Figure 4.2
where we can clearly see that most of the courses were ranked above average (for CEAS)
in student satisfaction. We then examined the course which ranked unacceptably high in
05-06, CME 314 and read in more detail the written comments. We also met with the
64
students and discussed their complaints at the CME Club meeting. The root of the
dissatisfaction seemed to stem from the fact that the course did not have a recitation
section and the students felt that they needed more time and more practice to learn the
material. The felt that even though the instructor was well prepared and taught the course
clearly, the material was mathematically difficult and they needed more drills before new
material was introduced. The UPC then proposed modifying the course to include the
recitation, but the CTPC denied the request since the program already has more than the
average amount of credits for the CEAS. A compromise was reached with the
introduction of a voluntary zero credit recitation section.
As can be seen from the evaluations in the following year 06-07, the student satisfaction
with the course was much improved.
In the 06-07 semester we also taught CME 401 (Separation Technologies I) for the first
time. Again the evaluation score was worse than average. Meeting with the students at
the CME club meeting and reading the written comments again indicated that the
materials were difficult and a recitation session where students could do practice
problems would be very useful. Based on our experience with CME 314 in the previous
semester, we introduced a zero credit recitation for this course as well. Student comment
was favorable, but we will evaluate this course again next year.
We were surprised to see that CME 312 (Materials and Energy Balance) scored much
worse in the 06-07 semester than in the 05-06 semester, without any significant change in
either curriculum or instructor. Closer examination indicated a bimodal distribution of the
student scores. Good scores, similar to the previous year, were given to this course by
students already in the CME major, while students who did not have the credentials to be
accepted in the major and did not have the prerequisite grades in the foundation courses
scored the course poorly. Discussion with the students in the CME program at the CME
Club meeting indicated that the students in the program felt that the lack of preparation of
the non-CME majors prevented the instructor from teaching the course properly. In the
previous year, only CME majors had enrolled in the course. To remedy this situation the
UPC decided to prevent students who did not achieve a grade of B- or higher in CME
304 and in the foundation courses to advance in the program. CME 304 is the first CME
elective that students can take after the foundation courses and is a prerequisite for CME
312. This restriction would then allow only students who have had adequate preparation
to register in the course and hence allow the instructor to teach it at the intended level
designed to meet the outcomes and the professional component described later.
65
Figure B4.2 Results of student satisfaction survey for each course
Average scores for CME Teaching Evaluations
3.00
2.50
CEAS average
Average scores
2.00
AY 05-06
1.50
AY 06-07
1.00
0.50
0.00
01
CM 4
CM 0
CM 2
CM 4
CM 5
CM 8
CM 0
CM 2
CM 3
CM 7
CM 1
CM 1
CM 2
CM 0
CM 0
CM 0
41
0
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
7
0
0
1
2
4
E1
E3
E3
E3
E3
E3
E3
E3
E3
E3
E3
E3
E4
E4
E4
E4
E4
E4
CM
CM
CME courses
ii. Student standing evaluations: An objective measure of the ability of the students to
absorb the curriculum is their ability to complete it and graduate in a timely manner, i.e.
in four years. The curriculum grid described in Section B5 is designed to guide the
student in choosing his/her courses in each of the eight semesters at Stony Brook
University. A good measure of the students’ abilities to advance in the curriculum is to
compare their standing in the university, i.e. U1, U2 etc. with their effective standing in
the CME program as determined by their progress relative to the flow chart in Section
B5. The UPC reviews student transcripts every year and determines if they progressing
properly. The transcripts of the students are attached in the appendix. Every student who
is accepted in the major also has an open file where his progress in different areas is
charted by the assistant to the chair and the file is reviewed annually by the UPC. These
files are also included in the appendix, where the progress of individual students can be
reviewed. Here we summarize the overall findings which relate to the timely progress of
the students in meeting the requirements for graduation. (We also review the grades of
the students in order to determine if the course materials are of the appropriate difficulty,
and as of now we have found that the students are not having any problems in meeting
the grade requirements as well. But if problems would arise, we are prepared within the
evaluation process of the grid to remedy the situation, as described in this document. )
Determination of student progress: For each student an average ratio of their CME
standing (semester: 1 freshman-4 senior) divided by their university standing, was
calculated from their transcripts found in the appendix .The ratios are tabulated in Table
B4.1 for each student and an average for each grade is calculated in the last column.
66
Table B4.1 College standing versus standing in CME of those in the program
University Level Ucme/Uuniv Number of students Average
U1 1.0/1.0 6.0 1.0
U2 1.0/2.0 3.0
2.0/2.0 6.0 1.7
U3 3.0/3.0 1 3.0
U4 4.0/4.0 4.0 3.5
3.0/4.0 2.0
2.0/4.0 1.0
Total 23 Students in
program
From the table we can see that the majority of students, in each grade U1 through U4,
are progressing accordingly within the CME program. This indicates that the program
that we have designed, despite its high credit load, is reasonable and does not represent
an undo hardship for the students who meet the criteria for admission.
iii. The incremental survey given to the students in the middle of each semester. The
purpose of these surveys is to gauge the students’ satisfaction with the continuity of the
program. Basically, is the curriculum structured so that the foundation courses prepare
them for the entry level CME courses, which in turn should prepare them for the upper
division courses and senior theses. The students are also surveyed as to their advising and
mentoring experience and the extent that this experience impacted their ability to make
career choices.
Two different surveys exist, one for freshmen and sophomores, which emphasizes the
experience with the foundation courses and one for juniors and seniors, which
emphasizes their preparation for the upper division courses and eventually graduation and
the work place. Several questions are common to both questionnaires and are designed to
gauge how the students are progressing in their understanding of the expectation for
chemical engineers in the work place, and the degree to which each level of coursework
is preparing them for the next stage.
These surveys were created by the CME program coordinators and are anonymous. They
are handed out to students who attend the CME Club meetings. The students are asked to
rate several questions on a scale of 1-10 (10 representing the highest score). In order to
match the rubric of the other evaluation tools, in the future the surveys will also use a
scale of 1 through 4, as described above.
Fresh/Soph Surveys
(See sample Fresh/Soph Survey in section E of the Appendix.)
The questions ask about the quality of instruction on mandatory prerequisite courses
taken in other departments. A separate section asks students to rate experiences particular
to the CME program: advising, understanding what is necessary to graduate, knowledge
of possible CE careers, preparedness for possible CE careers and likelihood of going into
industry or graduate school. These latter questions address their awareness of broader
issues regarding careers in CME, which are mostly covered in CME101 and are designed
67
to help them make a sound career choice. These questions are related directly to
outcomes H, I and J.
The results of these surveys are tallied below for S07, with special attention being given
to the students’ rating of instruction from other departments.
Table B4.2 Fresh/Soph Student Survey Results for S07
Question Rating (1=poor, 10=excellent)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 N/A
1a. Rate exp w/ chemistry 7% 21% 36% 29% 7%
1b. Rate exp w/ physics 21% 7% 7% 14% 7% 29% 14%
1c. Rate exp w/ mathematics 14% 14% 14% 36% 7% 14%
2. Sophomores: Rate the quality 14% 36% 36% 7% 7%
of instruction for CME 304
3. Rate the difficulty of the 7% 7% 7% 50% 21% 7%
course content for CME 304
4. Were you graded fairly in 7% 7% 7% 7% 14% 50% 7%
CME 304?
5. Are you satisfied with the 7% 7% 14% 29% 29% 14%
advising for the CME major?
6. Do you understand what is 7% 7% 14% 14% 29% 14% 14%
expected to complete CME
degree?
7. Are you familiar with careers 21% 14% 21% 29% 14%
available for Chemical
Engineers?
8. Will you seek a post-graduate 14% 14% 14% 21% 7% 21% 7%
degree?
9. Are you planning to work 21% 7% 7% 36% 21% 7%
right after graduation?
10. Do you feel prepared to 7% 7% 14% 14% 36% 14% 7%
handle ethical and moral issues
that may arise in the work place
or classroom?
Change engendered from Fresh/Soph Surveys: The percentile ratings were analyzed
carefully, and any question where more than 10% of the students scored below six was
investigated. Two areas of concern became immediately obvious where more than 20%
of the students polled expressed dissatisfaction (score less than 6).
Physics
One of the common comments on the Fresh/Soph surveys was the students’ complaints
about the mandatory prerequisite Physics courses. More than one student complained
about the instructors’ aloof attitude toward the students and the very large amount of
material that was covered too quickly. When this was discussed at a UPC meeting (See
UPC minutes dated February 19, 2007), it was decided to invite the Physics
68
Undergraduate Program Director (UPD) to the next CME Club in order to discuss these
issues and see what can be done to remedy them. The Physics UPD agreed to attend the
meeting and the following issues were resolved and/or clarified: (See CME Club minutes
dated March 7, 2007.)
• Students complained that too much material was covered in the course. The solution
was for the Physics Department to split the course into three semesters, PHY 125,
126, 127, which covered the same material as the two semester sequence, PHY
131/132, but at a slower pace. This option was particularly attractive to students who
had not taken physics in high school or were taking it together with the calculus co-
requisite.
• At the opposite end of the spectrum, several CME students expressed an interest in
designing a physics concentration. The UPD informed us that not only was this
possible, but students in CME, who specialized in physics, can also apply for a minor
in the subject.
PEO 4:
Education in chemical engineering
fundamentals
Learning outcome: Performance Criteria
Ability to apply math, science and CME club meeting
engineering to chemical engineering Students express dissatisfaction
problems with Physics, recorded in minutes
UPC
Members agreed to invite Physics
UPD to next meeting
Data Collection & Analysis
Minutes of CME club meeting distributed.
Complaints brought to committee’s attention.
Suggestion to invite Physics UPD to next CME
Club meeting approved for submission to UPC.
4.1.5 Advising
Despite having taken CME 101, where possible careers in chemical engineering are
thoroughly explored, a surprising number of students (21%) claimed that they were still
not familiar with careers available to chemical engineers. Even though we did not hear
any formal complaints at the CME Club meetings, the UPC members felt that this may be
69
due to insufficient advising time to the students. To remedy this we will assign each
student, next semester, a dedicated advisor who will oversee his or her work and progress
in the CME program.
Junior Senior Surveys
(See sample Jr/Sr Survey in section E of the Appendix)
These surveys were created by the CME program coordinators and are anonymous. They
are handed out to students who attend the CME Club meetings. These surveys are
intended to follow up on some of the questions asked on the Fresh/Soph surveys as well
as ask additional questions pertaining to their overall educational experience in the
program.
The students are asked to rate on a scale of 1-10 (10 representing the highest score) how
well the mandatory prerequisite courses taken in other departments prepared them for
upper level CME courses. A second section asks students to rate their level of expertise in
a range of skills they are expected to have when they graduate. In the future the scale will
change from 1-4 in order to comply with the rubric for the other tools.
70
Table B4.3 Jr/Sr Student Survey Results for S07
Question Rating (1=poor, 10=excellent)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NA
1a. Rate exp w/ chemistry 25% 50% 25%
1b. Rate exp w/ physics 50% 25% 25%
1c. Rate exp w/ math 75% 25%
1d. Do the foundation courses 25% 25% 50%
prepare you for the CME
courses?
2a. Rate strength in 25% 75%
experimental methods
2b. Rate strength in technical 25% 25% 25% 25%
writing
2c. Rate strength in oral 25% 25% 50%
presentation
2d. Rate strength in process 25% 25% 50%
engineering and design
2e. Rate strength in lab safety 25% 75%
2f. Rate strength in data 25% 25% 50%
analysis and interpretation
3 Are you satisfied with the 50% 50%
advising available for CME
majors?
4 How familiar are you w/ 25% 25% 50%
possible CME careers?
5 How likely are you to seek a 25% 25% 25% 25%
post-graduate degree?
6 How likely are you go into 25% 25% 50%
the job market immediately
after graduation?
7 Do you feel prepared to 25% 25% 50%
handle difficult ethical/moral
issues in the workplace?
8 Are the specializations 25% 50% 25%
offered relevant to your career
objectives?
9 Research or internship helpful 75% 25%
in choosing career objectives
The results of these surveys are then processed by the DCAC and the results are reviewed
by the UPC, which then recommends appropriate actions depending on the perceived
deficiencies or recommendations for improvement.
From the junior/senior surveys we find that the overall student satisfaction rates with the
program were relatively high, with scores averaging around 8 and 9. Overall the students
felt that the foundation courses had provided adequate preparation for 300 level CME
71
courses, which in turn prepared them for the advanced 400 level courses. The students
were very satisfied with the advising and felt informed and prepared to make career
choices. The greatest degree of satisfaction, 9, was expressed with the opportunities to
intern with a company or with a research group, which they found very helpful in
selecting a career objective.
The only element that received a score of 4 was the one dealing with process engineering
and design. When this issue was raised at the CME club meeting, the source of
dissatisfaction became clear. The students who were of junior or senior standing had
taken most of their laboratory courses at BNL since our labs were not fully set up yet.
They felt that they did not get enough design experience using existing BNL facilities. In
addition CME 410 was run as a design and software simulation course. The solution was
found by
(a) Moving the laboratory from BNL to a new facility built for CME in Room 254 of the
Heavy Engineering building and (b) moving the computer simulation components to
CME 315, and allowing more hands-on design and experimentation to occur in CME
410.
iv. CME Club “Town Hall Meetings”
(See CME Club Meeting minutes in section G.b of the Appendix.)
CME Club meetings are held every other week during the academic semesters. The club
is student governed, university supported and is seeking membership in AIChE. Faculty
members attend these meetings and listen to complaints about academic issues and any
other program-related business that students want to discuss. The conversations at these
meetings are recorded in minutes and distributed to the faculty members prior to their
weekly Undergraduate Program Committee (UPC) meetings. The salient points of the
minutes are then incorporated into the agenda for review by the UPC. The minutes from
these meetings are reviewed on a regular bi-weekly basis by the UPC and as was
illustrated in the examples in the sections above, appropriate actions are taken by the
UPC in response to these meetings. The advantage of these meeting is that it enables us
to have a rapid turnaround in solving problems and offering solutions.
Change engendered from CME Club Meeting: Organic Chemistry
An issue, of central importance to the efficient operation of the whole program, was
discovered at one of the town meetings (see CME Club minutes dated November 15 &
26, 2006). Casual discussion with the students inquiring into their experiences with
registering for the spring semester uncovered a problem with a core organic chemistry
laboratory, CHE 384. This course, offered in the spring, is the follow-up to another
mandatory prerequisite organic chemistry laboratory course, CHE 383, which is offered
in the fall. Without notifying the CME program the Chemistry Department decided to
restrict registration to CHE 384 only to chemistry majors, and CME students were unable
to register for this course. We immediately invited the chair and the UPD of the
Chemistry Department to the next CME UPC meeting, to discuss this matter. (See UPC
minutes dated December 18, 2006.) The problem immediately was traced to budget cuts
within the chemistry department that did not allow for another teaching assistant needed
to accommodate the five CME students who needed this course. A solution was quickly
72
found, by placing a graduate student from the Materials Science Graduate Program who
had an undergraduate degree in organic chemistry as the TA.
Change engendered from CME Club Meeting: Specializations
At the CME Club meetings students consistently asked about the availability of certain
specializations and the heavy prerequisite load of others. (See CME minutes dated
October 3, 2006.) These suggestions were discussed at various UPC meetings (see UPC
Minutes dates October 16, 2006), and as a result the following specializations were either
cancelled due to lack of relevant coursework, revamped to help minimize an overload of
prerequisites or created from scratch. All have been approved by the CTPC. (See section
B.d of the Appendix.)
• Polymer Science
Revamped to accommodate cancellation of two ESM courses. Two new CME courses
were developed to take the place of the cancelled courses. (See course descriptions in
section B.c of the Appendix for CME 371 and CME 470.)
• Tissue Engineering
New specialization in response to requests from CME students interested in biochemical
processes and the BE/MD program.
• Custom: Designed to allow flexibility in the program to reflect emerging interests
within chemical engineering, such as energy and the environment.
• Pharmacology: Lengthy discussion with the UPD of pharmacology resulted in a
specialization which also allows students to minor in pharmacology, as well as participate
in the BE/MD program.
• Environmental Sensing and Compliance and Nuclear and Chemical Hazard Detection
and Prevention
Cancelled due to lack of relevant coursework.
• Business Management and Technology Transfer
Replaced by the Business Specialization and revamped to allow for the minor in business
and the BE/MBA program.
Change engendered from CME Club Meeting: Minors
Having minors was another point of interest for CME students. (See CME Club minutes
dated February 7, 2007.) As a result, the following minors were created. (See Minors in
section B.E of the Appendix.)
4.1.6 Student Performance
i. Student performance is most easily gauged by monitoring the final grades
obtained in each course. The program monitors the grades of each student in order to
determine if he/she is progressing properly. In addition we monitor the grades for the
program overall and try to determine whether a correlation exists between the student
grades, the student course evaluations, and the time allocated. The results for the F06 and
S07 are shown in Figure B4.3 where we can see that the average in most courses was a
3.0.
73
Figure B4.3 Average grades in each CME course offered
CME Grades per Academic Year
5.00
4.00
Grades
3.00 2005/06
2.00 2006/07
1.00
0.00
C 371
C 10 1
C 30 4
C 31 0
C 31 2
C 31 4
C 31 5
C 31 8
C 32 0
C 32 2
C 32 3
M 7
C 40 1
C 40 2
C 41 0
C 42 0
C 44 0
41
C 32
E4
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
C
CME Class
ii. Students are required to submit a portfolio which includes samples of all their work in
each course. The CCC and the EAB members can then use these portfolios to track
student work and compare the effectiveness of the tools outlined in Section 3 that should
help the students achieve the outcomes of the program. Samples of the portfolios will be
provided. The performance of the students in each of the strategies for each course is
graded on a scale of 1 to 4 according to the rubric above, and a composite score of
student performance, produced both by external (EAB) members and internal reviewers
(CCC) is obtained for each of the outcomes.
iii. We will require that all students take the FE exam prior to graduation. The department
will cover the fee. The test scores will be used to evaluate the preparation that our
students receive compared to others across the United States relating to outcomes a-k,
and will also give us an indication whether our graduates are adequately prepared to take
the PE exam at a later point in their careers. In order to prepare our students for both the
FE and the PE exam, a preparatory course where students will review the material and
take practice examinations will be offered. The course will be given by Dr. Frank
Szalajda who received his PE certification, is familiar with the examination, and has
taught the preparatory course at other institutions.
Last semester the CME Club invited Dr. Szalajda to lecture on the PE exam and provide
some sample examinations. The outcome of the meeting was:
(1) The students realized that our curriculum covered most of the materials on the PE
exam except for the business plan sections. That material was taught in courses which are
part of the business concentration. The students suggested that at least one of the business
courses become part of the CME core rather than an optional elective.
(2) Students then voted unanimously to have Dr. Frank Szalajda teach a PE preparatory
course next semester. The UPC has yet to decide whether the students will register for the
course and receive college credit.
iv. In order to obtain an objective evaluation of our laboratory sequence and the
preparation of our students regarding creative research, laboratory design, knowledge of
74
contemporary issues, and preparation for lifelong learning, each student will be required
to select an external reader for his/her senior thesis. The reader will then grade the thesis
based on the evaluation criteria outlined in the appendix. We will solicit potential readers
from industry, national laboratories, and chemical engineering departments at other
institutions and generate a list according to the specialization which the students
presenting their senior theses could choose from.
v. The AIChE sponsors an annual student research meeting at which chemical
engineering undergraduate students present their research and compete for awards. A
formal evaluation by the AIChE judging committee of the students’ work can be obtained
by prior arrangement with the AIChE, once the student chapter has been accepted for
membership. Our students will be accepted next year, having fulfilled their requirement
as “interns” attendees for the past two years.
vi. In addition to ranking the program as a whole, the EAB members are also requested to
rank the students research projects according to the questionnaire shown in Figure B4.4.
75
Figure B4.4 AIChE evaluations
CME Research Projects
March 30-31, 2007
Title (use abbreviated title):
_______________________________________________________
Name of presenters/school they represent:
__________________________________________
1. Where did you complete your work (at which school or elsewhere)?
__________________________________
2. Was this voluntary research or mandatory as part of a course?
__________________________________
3. How many CME lab courses did you take before creating your poster?
__________________________________
Does the project have a clear objective? Excellent Very Good Fair Poor
Good
Does the project show creative ability and
originality?
Was there a procedural plan for obtaining a
solution and are there adequate data to support the
conclusions?
Is the student/team familiar with the relevant
literature?
How well does the student communicate his/her
project and explain the purpose, procedure and
conclusions?
Is the research publishable in a refereed journal?
76
4.1.7 Summary of the Criteria and the Tools and an example of the process
In order to ensure that a balance exists between external and internal assessment,
the tools used to measure each criteria are summarized in the table below. From the table
we see that each criterion has at least one external measurement device, while some, like
student performance, may have five.
Table B4.4 Summary of Criteria and Measurement Tools
Measurable Survey and Internal/External Grading Rubric
Performance Measurement Tool Assessment
Criteria
A. Course Content Time allocation Internal No
chart
Course Coordinator Internal Yes
evaluations
EAB evaluation External Yes
B. Student Course evaluations Internal Yes
Satisfaction
Student standing External No
Jr/Sr and Fr/Soph Internal Yes
Surveys
CES town hall Internal No
meeting
C. Student Course grades Internal Yes
Performance
Portfolio review Internal and Yes
External
FE examination External Yes
AIChE meeting External Yes
EAB review External Yes
Senior thesis Internal and Yes
External
4.2 Analysis, Assessment, and Evaluation
The DCAC:
The data collected using the tools summarized above is processed by the Data Collection
and Analysis Committee, chaired by Lynn Allopenna, assistant to the chair of ESG. The
other members of the committee are appointed by the program chair. Input to this
committee can also come from the course evaluators who grade the relationships between
the course outcomes and the course strategies and the relationship between student
performance and the course outcomes. Data is input to this committee also from surveys
which comprise Loop 2. Large data banks of employers of chemical engineers, both
regionally and locally, as well companies offering internships to undergraduates are kept
by the Stony Brook Career Center. Hence they have volunteered to help us in conducting
the surveys dealing with regional economic development and program objectives.
77
Analysis formed by this committee will then be presented to the UPC for further
deliberations.
The UPC: (See UPC Meeting minutes in section G.a of the Appendix.)
UPC meetings were conducted each week during the fall and spring semesters. The UPC
is chaired by the program co-directors and the members were listed previously. This year
the meetings were open to all CME faculty members. All data collected from the bi-
weekly meeting of the CME Club, questionnaires, surveys, EAB comments etc. were
discussed at these meetings and appropriate actions taken. Numerous refinements of the
program and substantial improvements were made as a result of processing the input and
deliberations at these meetings. Below are some of the changes made as a result of
discussions at these meetings.
4.2.1 Change engendered from UPC Meeting
Statistics added to curriculum
In discussion during a UPC meeting about the students’ desire to have the Business
minor, the point was brought up that CME students did not have enough statistics in their
curriculum to satisfy the Business Department. (See UPC minutes dated September 25,
2006).
An instructor from the Applied Math department was invited to talk at the following UPC
meeting to discuss classes offered by Applied Math and appropriate possibilities for our
students. (See UPC minutes dated October 30, 2006.)
It was determined that there was no appropriate class offered by the Applied Math
department. Therefore new discussion centered around incorporating statistics into CME
315 which was then called Numerical Methods for Chemical Engineering Analysis. The
class was renamed to Numerical Methods and Statistical Analysis, and the syllabus was
changed to incorporate the statistics needed for CME students to fulfill the business
minor without taking any additional courses. Below is the change in the course
description. (For all course syllabi see course descriptions in section B.c of the
Appendix.)
Old course description: Mathematical modeling lies at heart of chemical engineering.
Understanding, predicting, designing, optimizing, and controlling chemical processes and
phenomena all require the development of good mathematical models. This course
provides students with the concepts, processes, and tools for an introduction to such
chemical engineering calculations with a mathematical software package (MATLAB).
New course description: This course provides students with an opportunity to critically
analyze experimental data and to develop engineering models by integrating a variety of
computer-based programs: (1) Error analysis of experimental data using statistical
programs such as Minitab; (2) Plotting and fitting for experimental data using plotting
programs such as Origin, (3) Solving numerical equations using mathematical programs
such as Mathematica; (4) Process simulation for typical chemical engineering processes
(unit operation, distillation, etc.) using simulation programs such as Simcad-Pro.
78
Change engendered from UPC Meeting:
New prerequisite for continuing in CME program
An item brought up at a UPC meeting was the trouble some students were having in the
upper level CME courses. (See UPC minutes dated February 12, 2007.) UPC members
decided two things:
1. Change the admission policy for transfer students to read “No grade lower than a B in
any physics, math or chemistry class needed for the major.”
2. Require all students to have a B- or better in CME 304 Thermodynamic I before they
can move on in the program. (The latter was passed through the CTPC on February 23,
2007.)
4.3 The Objectives Feedback Loop
This loop is designed to measure the degree to which the performance of our students
meets the educational objectives of the program after graduation. This is a much slower
loop where data are required over longer term performance. Ideally the data should be
collected each year and evaluated both as a progression and an indication of the impact of
changes in the program due outcome evaluations in Loop 1.
This loop has only one performance criteria: How well do graduates from the program
fulfill the program objectives and hence the mission of the program? The tools of
assessment rely mostly on external evaluations by alumni, employers, and graduate
program directors.
4.3.1 The Alumni Survey
Our program has one graduate, Nathan Hould, who graduated last year. We
therefore have at least a one-year perspective on some of the program objectives. Nathan
is doing very well in the Chemical Engineering Program at the University of Delaware.
He is in the PhD program, has passed his qualifying examinations, without difficulty and
has begun research on his PhD thesis, dealing with nanoparticles mediated catalysis
systems. He has submitted some of the research to the Materials Research Society
meeting this fall in Boston. The research is an outgrowth of an internship project he
began while in his junior year within the CME program.
His replies to the alumni survey are listed below;
Name: Nathan Hould
Year of Graduation from CME Program: May, 2006
Postgraduate History:
Years: 1 School: University of Delaware Degree (expected):Ph.D, Chemical
Engineering.
79
Employment History:
Period Company Title
2006 Summer Synchrotron Catalysis Consortium Research Assistant
2006 Fall to Present University of Delaware Graduate Student
Please give a brief description of your duties in your current position
Graduate student obligations: passing classes, conducting independent research.
List of Publications/ Patents
N/A
List of Conferences/ Presentations
1) D. Mahajan N. Hould J. Fletcher S. Joseph P. Gütlich Slurry Phase Fischer-Tropsch
Synthesis Catalyzed by Nano-Sized Iron: Effect of Particle Size. 2006 AICHE Annual
Meeting
2) N. Hould J. Zhou N. Pernodet M. Rafailovich A. Frenkel EXAFS Studies of TiO2
Nanoparticles. 2006 MRS Fall Meeting
3) A. Frenkel S. Azran B. Nina G. Cwilich E. Deutsch E. Horowitz N. Hould L. Kanner
D. Lowenstein A. Mayerhoff Y. Platt M. Rafailovich S. Schechet M. Simpser D.
Turetsky D. Wermuth J. Zhou S. Zhao F. Zypman Size Control, Characterization and
Hydrogenation Studies of Fuel Cell Nanocatalysts. 2006 MRS Fall Meeting
License/ Certifications:
(ex. FE, PE, etc.)
N/A
Membership in Professional Societies:
(ex. AICHE.)
1. AICHE student member
2. Materials Research Society
80
How often do you attend Professional Chapter meetings?
Annually and I will attend the MRS conference this fall in Boston.
Please rate each answer from 1-10 (1=poor, 10=excellent)
1. How has the core coursework in the program prepared you for either graduate
school or your job?
Chemistry
o o o o o o o o • o o
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NA
Physics
o o o o o o o o • o o
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NA
Computer science
o o o o o o • o o o o
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NA
Mathematics
o o o o o • o o o o o
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NA
2. Rate the relevance of the following main components of the CME core sequence
to your current position on a scale of 1-10.
Classes Industry Academia Research
CME Fundamentals: 10 6
Thermodynamics
Heat & Mass Transfer
Materials Energy Balance
Reaction Eng & Kinetics: 10 6
Material & Energy Balance
Kinetics
Separations
Process and Engineering Design: 10 6
Sr Design I, II
Numerical Methods for Analysis
Molecular Modeling
Laboratory Sequence: 10 10
Unit Operations
Directed Research
Internships
81
3. Do you feel you have been adequately prepared for working with people from
other disciplines in your workplace?
o o o o o o o o • o o
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NA
4. Has the coursework prepared you to operate effectively within the chemical
engineering profession in a matter which holds paramount the importance of public
health, safety, ethical and moral responsibilities?
o o o o o o o o • o o
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NA
5. Do you feel that you can contribute effectively operating as a member of a team?
o o o o o o o o • o o
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NA
6. Has your background prepared you to be an effective leader and mentor?
o o o o o o o o • o o
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NA
Alumnus Comments on Stony Brook University’s Chemical and
Molecular Engineering Program:
When I entered the CME program in my sophomore year I found that the faculty in place
where very helpful in providing me with research opportunities. This emphasis was
continued throughout my undergraduate education and I consider it the strongest point in
the CME program. It provided me with breadth of knowledge and the skills that are now
allowing me to succeed in my graduate education. The projects that I worked on are in
chronological order: Homogeneous Phase Catalysts for the Water-Gas-Shift Reactions,
Fischer-Tropsch Synthesis by Nanosized Iron, Rheological Characterization of Aqueous
PPO-PEO-PPO Tri-block Copolymer Solutions Modified with Nano-Clays and Serum.
Comments: (The actions taken by the UPC in response to Nathan’s comments are
listed in bold)
I believe that the students who graduate from the CME program should be familiar with a
mathematical package such as Matlab, Mathematica, or maple.
Incorporated as part of CME315 and is pending approval by the CTPC.
Computer Programming: Students should take a C/C++ programming class. It will allow
CME 327 to proceed efficiently given that it is taught in C/C++.
ESG111 which teaches programming in C++ is now mandatory.
CME 304/314: When I took this class very little time was spent on phase equilibria. This
is an important part of Thermodynamics and a large portion of the 314 should be spent on
82
Gas-Liquid, and Liquid-Liquid equilibrium. An introduction to Statistical Mechanics at
the end of 314 would be another good addition.
Both topics were introduced. More material could now be covered as a result of the
additional recitation sections discussed previously.
CME 312: Should be introduced much earlier than first semester in junior year. I believe
that the material that it covers would be better suited to a first semester sophomore level
class.
Students can now take this course as early as their third semester.
CME 315: I did not have the opportunity to take this class but I believe it should be
mandatory. It would be ideal place to teach things like Newton’s method for non-linear
equation solving and some numerical methods to solve Differential Equations. This class
could be taught in C/C++ to provide a good stepping stone into 327 or possibly in a
mathematica, matlab, or maple environment.
Class is now mandatory and the curriculum has been revamped. Numerical
methods using Mathematica are now taught.
CME 323: When I took the class we spent a large amount of time on kinetics and a small
amount of time on reactors. I believe that the class should be structured so that kinetics is
covered for less than ½ of a semester maybe even only for 1/3 of the semester. With this
structure a large amount of time could be spent dealing with reactors and moving on to
multiple steady state Constant Stirred Tank Reactors at the end of the semester. This class
would be a good time for the students to practice some of the numerical methods learned
the previous semester in CME 315.
Course was restructured and CME315 offers the materials suggested.
CME 327: A great class. However, it would be more effective if all students knew C/C++
before they entered. It was very useful in my graduate studies. My final project in
chemical kinetics was a Monte Carlo simulation of CO oxidation on an isotropic surface.
This course is unique to our program and emphasizes our students’ ability to
simulate phenomena at the molecular level. ESG 111 is now a prerequisite for this
course.
CME 401/402: I felt that the separations class needs the most work of any. I believe that
the first semester should focus on some of the classical chemical engineering techniques
distillation, phase equilibrium, and introduction of Fick’s first and second laws for
diffusion. The 402 class should be structured into a class of transport phenomena where
Navier-Stokes equations of continuity are reviewed along with equations of heat and
mass transfer considering diffusion, convection, and accumulation.
83
Course sequence was completely restructured and being taught by new faculty
members in the department.
CME 410: A wet lab should be set up on campus, something with a distillation unit, heat
exchanger, chemical reaction unit, etc.
Complete set of advanced laboratory facilities have been established at Stony Brook
and easily accessible for all CME students.
CME 420: Senior Research project was great.
CME 410/440: Process engineering went great.
Linear algebra is also very useful and I think it would be good if students were
encouraged to take a course in it such as MAT 211.
Nathan felt that the small size of the program greatly enhanced the individual attention
paid to his development which more than overcame any shortages in the instruction.
Furthermore, the broad interdisciplinary nature of the program and its focus on the
nanoscale helped him quickly establish a creative and independent PhD research program
and perform very well as compared to his peers from other chemical engineering
programs.
4.3.2 The External Advisory Board (EAB)
The current members of the External Advisory Board were chosen to represent a
balanced mix of scientists from industry, national laboratories, and academia. The
industrial members were from companies who were original stakeholders in the program,
i.e. lobbied to establish the program with an eye towards workforce and regional
economic development. The academic partners are members of chemical engineering
departments, who have highly ranked graduate and undergraduate programs. Hence they
can comment both on our curriculum and its ability to prepare our graduates for
acceptance into highly ranked graduate programs. The members from national
laboratories can provide an objective evaluation of the contribution of our graduates in a
more global context.
The members of the External Advisory Board are:
Saied Tousi, Senior Vice President, Pall Corporation
Dennis Peiffer, Senior Scientist, ExxonMobil Research & Engineering Company
Rick Register, Professor, Chemical Engineering Department, Princeton University
Kalle Levon, Professor, Chemical & Biological Sciences Department, PolyTechnic
University
Sanat Kumar, Visiting Professor, Chemical Engineering Department, Columbia
University
Ralph James, Associate Laboratory Director, Energy, Environment & National
Security, Brookhaven National Laboratory
Daniel Maes, Vice President, Estee Lauder
84
(See section H.a of the Appendix for additional information on IAB members and their
credentials.)
The following is a summary of their report after their initial visit in March. EAB reviews
are expected to occur bi-annually.
Who attended Staff/Faculty:
D. Mahajan, N. Pernodet, M. Rafailovich, V. Zaitsev, T. Koga, A. Tobin. D. Gersappe,
M. Dudley, Y. Shamash (Dean), A. Silverstein (Chemistry), R. Kerber (Chemistry), W.
Calvo
Who attended EAB:
D. Maes, D. Peiffer, R. Register, S. Tousi, S. Kumar
Who attended Students:
Harsimran Kaur, Timothy Fraczak, Sheena Joseph, Johnny Wong, Nicole Brenner, Xiae
Shi, Henry Yang,
When: Wednesday, March 14 6-10:30 pm
Summary of EAB member comments:
The EAB members felt that the following points are most essential in the curriculum in
order to ensure success in the workplace for the graduates of the program;
1. It is important to teach students how to speak professionally, to both
those in the field as well as the layman; to synthesize reports into
presentations quickly, concisely, understandably. (PEO 2)
2. The students should know how to cost out processes/projects and do
cost analysis of potential process failures/’screw ups.’ (PEO 1,
preparation for the PE exam, and PEO 3)
3. Students need to learn how to work well in teams. (PEO 2)
4. Students must be well versed in safety regulations and practices (PEO
3, may have to be expanded to include this requirement. This will be
decided at the next UPC meeting).
5. Make students understand that what is most important to industry is a
willingness to realize they don’t know everything and to be open to
others’ ideas (PEO 2).
6. Emphasize ethical principles: Teach students when and how to share the
credit for an idea/project, and make sure students understand the
importance of and are well versed in IP and IP transfers (PEO 3).
All of these recommendations (except for parts of number 2) are in complete agreement
with our program objectives (PEOs) as stated. Hence we hope our alumni will be
prepared to enter the workforce or graduate programs next year after the second class
graduates.
The EAB also commented on the curriculum, which addresses issues in Loop 1. But
given their overall view of the program, we list them here where their connection to the
PEOs can be clarified.
85
EAB member suggestions for curricular improvement:
1. Consider decreasing the number of chemistry requirements (we will work with
the chemistry department in refining the curriculum) .
2. Integrate what is taught in CME 315 Numerical Methods and Statistical
Analysis into other CME classes. (There is too much material, but the course
was revamped to provide students with experience in chemical engineering
process and control software. )
3. Consider folding CME 401, 402 Separations I, II into one course and add
more bio and pharmaceutical separations. (There is too much material to fold
the courses. Students are already complaining. On the other hand, the BE/MD
program was added and the pharmaceutical minor and tissue engineering are
now selections for specialization.)
4. Put ‘outsiders’ on the senior thesis committees. (It is now required to have an
outside reader as part of the three member committee which reads the senior
thesis.)
5. Make sure students have hands-on experience with large equipment rather
than learning from simulated experiments. (The laboratory curriculum was
revamped with the curriculum for CME410 relegated to CME315, the course
which focuses purely on modeling. CME410 is now a unit operation course
where students research a topic in molecular engineering, desing a system,
begin preliminary experiments, and defend a thesis proposal. )
6. Consider a course on cost economics in tandem with the Business School,
and one on environmental remediation. (A course with the business school and
a sequence on technology business management is being planned in
conjunction with the business school. This course is also required for the FE
and the PE examinations and will be made part of the core CME curriculum
once it is approved by the CTPC).
4.3.3. Employer Survey
The following survey will also be mailed to members of the industrial community
and graduate program directors obtained from the data bank at the career center;
The data collected will be analyzed by the DCAC and used to make changes in all aspects
that contribute to further improvement of the program.
86
Sample Survey for Employers of Chemical Engineering Graduates
Survey for Employers
Name of company
_________________________________________________________________
Is your company regionally, nationally or internationally based? ____________________
How many employees work at your company?
__________________________________________
How many of these employees are Stony Brook University chemical engineering alumni
and in which departments do they work?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
As professionals who may seek to hire graduates of our B.E. program in Chemical
Engineering, it is extremely important that we be able to assess (1) how well our program
meets the needs of prospective employers and (2) how well the skills possessed by our
graduates will meet your needs. This information will be used to make improvements in
our program, benefiting both our students and their future employers.
On page two is a table that lists the skills our students should possess after they graduate.
Each of the categories in the table is followed by two response lines with a scale of 1 to 5
(or NA if you have not had any interaction with our students or graduates). 1 represents
“not important/not met at all” and 5 represents “extremely important/extremely well
met.” Please identify how important you feel the listed skills are, and how well you feel
our students with whom you have interacted (as employees or interns) have possessed
these skills. You may return the survey to us via the reply function in your email, or, if
you prefer, fax the completed survey to 631-632-8052.
87
Student skills Importance / How well met
[1]
NA 1 2 3 4 5
Ability to communicate effectively (importance)
NA 1 2 3 4 5
(how well met)
NA 1 2 3 4 5
Moral character and ability to assume ethical
(importance)
[2] responsibility
NA 1 2 3 4 5
(how well met)
NA 1 2 3 4 5
(importance)
[3] Ability to work in teams
NA 1 2 3 4 5
(how well met)
NA 1 2 3 4 5
(importance)
General knowledge of broader issues and
[4]
global significance
NA 1 2 3 4 5
(how well met)
NA 1 2 3 4 5
(importance)
Ability to learn new technologies and processes
[5]
NA 1 2 3 4 5
(how well met)
NA 1 2 3 4 5
[6] Demonstration of creativity and originality (importance)
NA 1 2 3 4 5
(how well met)
Demonstration of leadership abilities NA 1 2 3 4 5
[7] (importance)
NA 1 2 3 4 5
(how well met)
In addition, we would appreciate any information that would help us improve our
program and better prepare our graduates for successful careers, i.e. In what areas of
chemical engineering do you envision seeking new hires in the near future?
88
What prior training experience would you like them to have?
Thank you very much for your input.
89
5. Professional Component
In this section, we outline how the faculty administers the curriculum as per the CME
grid (see Figure B5.1) to prepare students for engineering practice. Specifically, we
discuss:
• The sequence of steps that ensure the students are prepared for chemical engineering
practice. The emphasis is on the integration of the coursework with the laboratory and
design course sequence, which culminates in the senior research thesis.
• The resources that are made available to conduct our program.
The chemical and molecular engineering curriculum provides students with a core
education in mathematics and the physical sciences along with a broad sequence of
courses covering general courses and electives in chemical engineering.
Figure B5.1 CME grid
Freshman Fall Freshman Spring
First Year Seminar 101 First Year Seminar 102
DEC A DEC
CME 101** AMS 161
AMS 151 CHE 132, 134
CHE 131, 133 PHY 131, 133
ESG 111
Sophomore Fall Sophomore Spring
AMS 261 AMS 361
CHE 321* CHE 322*
CHE 383* CHE 384*
PHY 132, 134 ESG 281
ESG 332 CME 304**
Junior Fall Junior Spring
CME 312* CME 323*
CME 310, 300* CME 320*
CME 314* CME 322*
CME 315* CME 327*
CME 318* Specialization 2
Specialization 1 DEC
Senior Fall Senior Spring
CME 401 CME 402
CME 410 CME 420
CME 440 CME 441
Specialization 3 Specialization 4
DEC DEC
DEC DEC
90
Courses with a * must be completed with a grade of C or higher
Courses with a ** must be completed with a grade of B- or higher
5.1 Mathematics and Natural Sciences
The major in chemical and molecular engineering requires that students take two years of
course work in mathematics and basic sciences. These course requirements are designed
to ensure that students take
• Four sequential courses in applied mathematics. The recommended is a fourteen-
credit sequence: AMS 151, AMS 161, AMS 261/MAT 203/MAT 205, AMS
361/MAT 303/MAT 305. Students may replace AMS 151, 161 with MAT 131,
132 or MAT 125, 126, 127 or MAT 141, 142.
• Six courses in chemistry. The recommended is a ten-credit sequence of general
chemistry: CHE 131, 132 General Chemistry I, II and CHE 133, 134 General
Chemistry Laboratory I, II; an eight-credit sequence of CHE 321 Organic
Chemistry I and CHE 322 Organic Chemistry IIA or CHE 326 Organic Chemistry
IIB; and a five-credit sequence of CHE 383, 384 Introductory and Intermediate
Synthetic and Spectroscopic Laboratory Techniques.
• Two courses on calculus-based classical physics (PHY 131, 132) with laboratory
experience (PHY 133, 134) and one course on modern physics (PHY 251) with
laboratory (PHY 252). Students may replace PHY 131/133 and PHY 132/134
with PHY 125, 126, 127 or PHY 141, 142. They may also replace PHY 251/252
with ESG 281: An Engineering Introduction to Solid State.
• One programming course: ESG 111 C Programming for Engineers. Any one of
the following may be substituted for ESG 111 with permission from the
undergraduate program director: MEC 111 Computer Science for Engineers,
MEC 112 Practical C/ C++ for Scientist and Engineers, ESE 124 Computer
Techniques for Electronic Design, CSE 130 Introduction to Programming in C.
5.2 General Education
5.2.1 The Diversified Education Curriculum (D.E.C.)
The major, electives, and general education courses are the three components of
the university education. While electives give students freedom to choose courses that
enhance their educational goals beyond the basic requirements set by the faculty, it is
general education that provides breadth of knowledge within a balanced liberal arts
framework and complementing the depth of knowledge gained through study of the
major. Stony Brook general education requirements are organized within the Diversified
Education Curriculum (D.E.C.) implemented in fall 1991. The D.E.C. is an articulated
program of courses in three categories that builds on required Entry Skills. The Entry
Skills, (1) Basic Mathematical Competence, (2) Basic Writing Competence, (3)
Elementary Foreign Language Competence, and (4) Competence in American History,
are satisfied by specified high school courses and grades, by SAT/ACT exam scores, by
Stony Brook placement exam, or by successful completion of selected Stony Brook
courses. The three D.E.C. categories are: University Skills, Disciplinary Diversity, and
Expanding Perspectives and Cultural Awareness. The D.E.C. is designed to help students
91
place the more specialized parts of their undergraduate study – their major and pre-
professional training – in a cultural and historical context.
Prior to implementation of the D.E.C., the University Senate approved a slightly abridged
version for students of the College of Engineering and Applied Sciences, recognizing that
CEAS degree program majors require significantly more credits for completion than in
College of Arts and Sciences programs. In order to complete all major program
requirements and all D.E.C. requirements, CEAS students would have to complete
significantly more credits than the total required by SUNY for the baccalaureate degree.
Hence the modified requirements for CEAS students omit the foreign language and the
recently implemented American history competencies, and include four less D.E.C.
courses for B.E. degree programs (and three less courses for B.S. degree programs in the
applied sciences) than required for College of Arts and Sciences programs. In waiving the
competencies and some course requirements for CEAS students, the faculty stipulated
that courses taken in satisfaction of Expanding Perspectives and Cultural Awareness must
be distributed to include courses from both the social sciences and the humanities in order
to ensure breadth across different disciplines. In meeting the requirements of the D.E.C.,
CEAS students in engineering degree programs typically complete one or two English
Composition courses, two humanities courses, one social science course, and three
courses in the area of Expanding Perspectives and Cultural Awareness which includes a
wide array of disciplines. These are in addition to the D.E.C. requirements in
mathematics and the sciences, which are met through completion of major requirements.
The three D.E.C. groups, University Skills, Disciplinary Diversity, and Expanding
Perspectives and Cultural Awareness are detailed here as required for students in CEAS
programs.
University Skills (satisfied by taking appropriate courses in D.E.C. categories A-D):
D.E.C. Category A, English Composition (2 courses): helps students
communicate effectively in written English. Satisfied by passing WRT101 and
WRT102 or WRT103. (ABET 3(d, g, h, k))
D.E.C. Category B, Interpreting Texts in the Humanities (1 course): helps
students develop skills of interpretation and analysis that will enable them to
examine subject matter critically. (ABET 3(b2, e, h, j))
D.E.C. Category C, Mathematical and Statistical Reasoning (1 course): helps
students understand and use quantitative skills and ideas critical to higher
education. (ABET 3(a, b2, e, h, k))
Disciplinary Diversity (satisfied by taking appropriate courses in D.E.C. categories E-
G):
D.E.C. Category E, Natural Sciences (2 courses): Expands student knowledge
of objects and processes observable in nature. (ABET 3(a, b1, b2, c, e, h, i, j, k))
D.E.C Category F, Social and Behavioral Sciences (1 course): Focuses on
individual and group behavior within society. (ABET 3(b2, c, d, g, h, i, j))
D.E.C. Category G, Humanities (1 course): Examine disciplines and methods
that express the way people view the human condition. (ABET 3(d, g, h, i, j))
Expanding Perspectives and Cultural Awareness (satisfied by taking appropriate
courses in D.E.C. categories H-K). In completing D.E.C. categories I and J,
CEAS students must select one from a humanities discipline and one from a social
science discipline.
92
D.E.C. Category H, Implications of Science and Technology (1 course): helps
students understand the social and global implications of science and technology.
(ABET 3(a, b2, d, e, f, g, h, i, j))
D.E.C. Category I, European Traditions (1 course): Considers Western
cultural tradition through specialized study of a European nation. (ABET 3(d, g,
h, i, j))
D.E.C. Category J, The World Beyond European Traditions (1 course): helps
students understand a nation, region or culture that is significantly different from
the United States and Europe in a least one respect. (ABET 3(d, g, h, i, j))
D.E.C. Category K, The American Experience in Historical Perspective (1
course): students study the diverse society of America from a historical
perspective. The focus may be on one group and its relation to the whole of U.S.
society or on the interactions of several groups within our culture. (Category K is
a requirement for CEAS B.S. degree students, including Computer Science, but
not for students pursuing the B.E. degree.)
A copy of the D.E.C. checklist for students appears in several publications for students
(Undergraduate Bulletin, Online Bulletin, and the Academic Planning Guide for
Freshmen).
In 2000 the trustees of the State University of New York (SUNY) established a
fundamental General Education curriculum with specified learning outcomes that all
students in colleges and universities in the state university system must satisfy in order to
graduate. In response, Stony Brook’s faculty reviewed this campus’s Diversified
Education Curriculum to ensure that it incorporated these outcomes, and additionally to
guarantee that it expanded upon them, thus ensuring that Stony Brook graduates have the
intellectual skills and knowledge to flourish professionally and personally. The SUNY
general education curriculum specifies learning outcomes in the following areas:
Mathematics, Basic Communication and Critical Thinking Competency, Foreign
Language, Information Management, Natural Sciences, Social Sciences, American
History, Western Civilization, Other World Civilizations, Humanities, and the Arts. The
D.E.C. was approved by the State as meeting the recommendations of the SUNY Senate
Task Force on General Education to satisfy the learning outcome areas. As above with
respect to credit load in CEAS programs, and in line with the approved D.E.C.
requirements for CEAS students, CEAS programs are not subject to the full SUNY
General Education Curriculum. This is consistent with policy set for students at two other
SUNY University Centers with engineering degree programs.
5.2.1 University Skills
This first group of D.E.C. requirements focuses on ways of learning essential to the entire
academic experience and subject matter intrinsic to liberal learning. They include the
following three categories:
Category A: English Composition (2 courses)
The ability to communicate effectively in written English is essential to success both in
the University and society. Students satisfy this requirement by passing WRT 101:
Introductory Writing Workshop and WRT 102: Intermediate Writing Workshop A or
WRT 103: Intermediate Writing Workshop B. The following notes define the specifics
related to Category A requirements:
93
1. A score of 4 or 5 on the University's writing placement examination satisfies the
first course of the two-course requirement.
2. Students must begin completion of Category A during their first year at Stony
Brook and must take writing courses in sequence until the requirement is
satisfied.
3. All transfer and re-matriculated students who have passed, with a grade of C or
higher, a composition course judged equivalent to WRT 102 or WRT 103 will
have satisfied this requirement.
4. Once matriculated, the student must complete Category A at Stony Brook.
Category B: Interpreting Texts in the Humanities (1 course)
Category B courses help students develop skills of interpretation and analysis that will
enable them to examine subject matter critically, not only in the humanities, but in all
other college courses.
Category C: Mathematical and Statistical Reasoning (1 course)
Category C courses help students understand and use quantitative skills and ideas critical
to higher education. The following defines the specifics relating to Category B
requirement:
1. The course offered for category C must be passed with a letter grade of C or
higher.
2. A score of 4 or 5 on the AP mathematics examination or a score of 6 or higher on
the Stony Brook’s mathematics placement examination satisfies category C.
5.2.2 Disciplinary Diversity
This second group of requirements exposes students to the modes of thinking,
methods of study, and subject matter of major branches of knowledge--natural and
physical sciences, social and behavioral sciences, and arts and humanities. They include
the following three categories:
Category E: Natural Sciences (2 courses)
Category E courses expand students’ knowledge about objects and processes observable
in nature, whether animate as in the biological sciences, or inanimate as in the physical
sciences of chemistry or physics.
For chemical and molecular engineering students, Category E requirement is included in
the major requirement on natural sciences which include eight credits of physics and
twenty-three credits of chemistry.
Category F: Social and Behavioral Sciences (1 course)
Category F courses focus on individual and group behavior within society. These
disciplines use methods such as historical analysis of documents, or survey and interview
data, to observe and analyze human activity and society.
Category G: Humanities (1 course)
Category G courses examine disciplines and methods that express the way people view
the human condition.
94
5.2.3 Expanding Perspectives and Cultural Awareness
This third and final group of requirements, includes courses in Category H, I, and
J, and challenges students to confront their own perceptions of the world and the people
in it. Courses in these categories build on study in the earlier categories.
Category H: Implications of Science and Technology (1 course)
Category H courses are designed to help students understand the social and global
implications of science and technology and to examine examples of the impact of
science, culture, and society on one another.
Category I: European Traditions (1 course)
Category I courses consider the Western cultural tradition through specialized study of a
European nation or area from one or more viewpoints (e.g., historical, artistic, social,
political).
Category J: The World Beyond European Traditions (1 course)
Category J courses increase students’ understanding of a nation, region, or culture that is
significantly different from the United States and Europe in at least one respect.
Notes:
1. In choosing courses to satisfy D.E.C. I and J, students must choose one with a
humanities designator and one with a social and behavioral sciences designator.
2. B.E. degree students may petition the Undergraduate Student Office for permission to
substitute a category K course for a category I or J course.
Category K: The American Experience in Historical Perspective
Category K courses enable students to build upon their knowledge of diverse traditions in
order to examine in detail the role of these traditions in forming American society.
Courses included explore either our nation's diversity of ethnic, religious, gender, or
intellectual traditions through a multicultural perspective or the relationship of a specific
ethnic, religious, or gender group to American society as a whole.
5.3 Engineering Topics
The curriculum covers engineering topics through a set of seventeen required courses and
four technical electives. The required courses include: (See also Figure 5.1.)
1. Lower-Level Chemical and Molecular Engineering Course
o CME 101 Introduction to Chemical and Molecular Engineering
o CME 304 Chemical Engineering Thermodynamics I
2. Upper-Level Chemical and Molecular Engineering Courses
o CME 312 Material and Energy Balance
o CME 314 Chemical Engineering Thermodynamics II
o CME 315 Numerical Methods for Chemical Analysis
o CME 318 Chemical Engineering Fluid Mechanics
o CME 322 Chemical Engineering Heat and Mass Transfer
95
o CME 323 Reaction Engineering and Chemical Kinetics
o CME 327 Molecular Modeling for Chemical Engineers
o CME 401 Separation Technologies I
o CME 402 Separation Technologies II
3. Materials Science Course
o ESG 332 Materials Science I: Structure and Properties of Materials
4. Laboratory and Instrumentation Courses
o CME 310 Chemical Engineering Laboratory I
o CME 320 Chemical Engineering Laboratory II
o CME 410 Chemical Engineering Laboratory III
o CME 420 Chemical Engineering Laboratory IV
5. Engineering Design Courses
o CME 440 Process Engineering and Design I
o CME 441 Process Engineering and Design II
6. Technical Electives
The areas of specialization, composed of four technical electives, must be
declared by the student in a written statement to the Undergraduate Program
Director (Dr. Miriam Rafailovich) by the end of the 3rd or junior year. The six
areas of specialization are Pharmacology, Materials Science, Polymer Science,
Business, Tissue Engineering and Custom. If the student chooses the “custom
mode,” then a specific concentration of four 300 level or higher courses will be
selected to achieve his/her goals.
The course requirements for these areas of specialization are detailed in section
B.d of the Appendix.
5.3.1 Summary of the curriculum
The curriculum is summarized in the grid shown in Figure B5.1 where the specific course
sequence the students are required to take is summarized semester by semester. As was
discussed in Section 4, if the students follow this sequence, then he can graduate within
four years. In a survey of the students in the program where we compared their university
standing with their standing according to this grid, we find that most students are on track
and will complete the program successfully and in a timely manner.
In Figure B5.2 we show a flow chart of the program where the course sequence, the
prerequisites and co-requisites are shown pictorially. Fall courses are in bold and spring
courses are in regular font and text boxes. All students are required to take these courses
to be eligible for graduation. Transfer students must have equivalent prior courses
approved per CEAS policy to apply for graduation. The CME core courses start with the
introductory course (CME 101) and culminate with design (CME 441) and independent
Research thesis (CME 420) thereby succinctly meeting our set-forth Educational
Objectives and preparing students to enter the job market. Specifically, the CME 420 and
CME 441 courses indulge students in life-long learning.
96
Figure B5.2 The four-year CME course sequence and the interrelationship between
courses.
97
5.4 Engineering Practice
The CME curriculum culminates in the senior year with two sets of courses that are
intended to test the students’ skills they learned in all the courses. First, the design
sequence, CME 440 and CME 441, prepares students in Chemical Engineering practice.
Second, the research sequence, CME 410 and CME 420, prepares students to conduct
original research on topics of interest to industry. Taken together, these four courses
prepare students to take on challenging tasks upon graduation with skills necessary to be
competitive in the workplace upon employment.
The senior Design sequence starts in the fall semester of the senior year with the first
course (CME 440: Design Project Part I). This course requires seniors to utilize
knowledge gathered in all the CME courses as well as the prerequisites (math, chemistry,
and physics) in the preceding three years. The project is intended to let the student
experience the workings of a modern plant. The course content follows the steps below:
• Students are divided into teams that consist of 2-3 members. The team size is kept
small to ensure each student takes on enough responsibility while experiencing
teamwork environment.
• Students select a project that is of interest to industry.
• The selected project is modularized and students learn the workings of each module.
• Each team then identifies the advantages and disadvantages of the selected process.
• Each team submits a progress report along the way, to show their strategy to move the
project forward. The instructor also tracks student progress using the progress reports.
• At the end of the semester:
o students make a presentation of the key features of their findings
o submit a final report
The final report reflects students’ understanding of the working knowledge of the process
and the plant. The final report becomes the basis of the Senior Design project-Part II.
While in CME 440, the students learn the basic concepts of a modern process plant, the
students continue with their project in CME 441 (CME 441- Design Project Part II) in the
spring semester with emphasis on process improvements. These improvements are driven
by Sustainability and hence process efficiency and waste minimization. Students retain
their team members who started the CME 440 project. The key features that are
mandatory for incorporation into the design project are as follows:
• Process Improvements. Each team must demonstrate their chemical engineering skills
by suggesting original process improvements and incorporating them into the existing
plant design.
• Safety and Health. Incorporation of all necessary safety features throughout the plant
as per OSHA standards.
• Waste Minimization. Waste minimization is emphasized to increase process
efficiency and byproduct minimization.
• Costing and Specifications. Each team prepares a detailed table that shows parts cost,
manufacturer and parts specifications as per ASTM standards.
98
• Operating Manual. Students must prepare an operating manual after all design
changes have been incorporated.
• Flow-sheet Preparation. Each team then develops a flow sheet of their improved
design by using VISIO program.
The course requires the following:
1. Submission of at least two interim reports for feedback by the instructor.
2. Each member then submits a Final Report.
3. Each team then makes a joint Oral presentation, each member emphasizing their
contribution to the project. The oral presentation is made to the graduate students
and select faculty.
The final flow sheet is designed to be open ended. We are now implementing ASPEN
PLUS software to complete the Economic analysis of the plant.
One of the key features of the two-course design sequence is the emphasis on not only
process design but also on the product design. This Product-Process nexus stems from
our philosophy that the process is based on the product manufacturing and sustainability
requires maximizing product with minimum waste that can only be implemented with
changes in processing conditions. So the CME students learn both process and product
design. As a sample, the students in the 2006-07 Fall-Spring semesters selected the
following topics for their design project:
1. Oil Shale extraction plant
2. Production of biodiesel from oils
3. Extraction of methane from methane hydrates
4. Fischer-Tropsch synthesis to produce clean transportation fuels.
The current CME design philosophy to teach students both product and process design
ensures that our graduates are fully prepared for engineering practice.
5.4.1 Professional Component: Math, Science, Engineering and General
Education
The professional component must include:
1. one year of a combination of college level mathematics and basic sciences (some
with experimental experience) appropriate to the discipline with a minimum of
32 credit hours
2. One and one-half years of engineering topics, consisting of engineering sciences,
and engineering design appropriate to the student’s field of study with a minimum
of 48 credit hours
3. a general education component that complements the technical content of the
curriculum and is consistent with the program and institution objectives.
The CME curriculum requires 45 credit hours of Basic sciences (Chemistry and Physics)
and Mathematics that exceeds the ABET requirement of 32. Further breakdown shows 14
credit hours of Math that includes intensive calculus training. In the basic sciences, the
99
Chemistry sequence is rigorous (23 credit hours) requiring general chemistry, organic
chemistry, synthetic and spectroscopic techniques to familiarize students with modern
synthesis of compounds and characterization of new materials. The Basic Sciences also
includes 8 credit hours of Physics with emphasis on Classical physics. Both
aforementioned Chemistry and Physics sequence require cumulative 8 credit hours of
Laboratory experience that prepares students to take on the Unit Operations Laboratory
(CME 310) that is introduced in the junior year when the CME sequence is fully
implemented.
The CME curriculum also requires 70 credit hours of engineering topics (including 11
credit hours in Engineering Science) that exceeds the ABET requirement of 48. The
engineering component in the curriculum is designed with emphasis on nanotechnology
and molecular level chemical engineering or CME while covering the core chemical
engineering topics. The CME courses cover core chemical engineering courses over 39
credit hours to cover the following topics: thermodynamics, material and energy balance,
transport phenomenon, reaction engineering and kinetics, modeling of chemical
engineering processes, separations, process design and control. The four laboratory
courses span 8 credit hours including unit operation and senior thesis based on original
research: these are included to cover required topics and emphasize molecular
engineering. Also included are four Engineering Science courses worth 11 credit hours to
cover programming and synthesis techniques for nanotechnology. Though a zero-credit
course, the course in Writing in Chemical Engineering ensures that our students are well
prepared with written and oral skills to be effective in the Chemical Engineering practice.
Furthermore, additional 12 credits are devoted solely to a specialization of the students
choosing but related to Chemical Engineering discipline. These 12 credits specialization
sequence constitutes four upper level courses that prepare students to enter a specific
industry. For example, students interested in working for a pharmaceuticals company
upon graduation may opt to complete the four-course sequence in Pharmacology- one of
the five specializations specified in Section 1.1. Thus our CME course grid of 138 credits
satisfies the basic requirements of the ABET Chemical Engineering but goes further to
train the students in molecular engineering, the main emphasis of our program.
The General Education component is covered with 23 credit hours. This is defined by the
University under the mandatory Diversified Education Curriculum (D.E.C.) courses
specified for the college of Engineering and Applied Science (CEAS) of which the CME
program is a part of. These courses cover non-engineering subjects in the College of Arts
and Sciences to make the CEAS curriculum well-rounded. Collectively, the D.E.C.
courses cover the General Education component with a strong foundation to achieve 3 a-
k outcomes with emphasis on ethics, effective communication, life long learning, and
contemporary issues.
Our close relationship with Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) and regional
industrial research laboratories which provide students with internship opportunities and
fellowships as mentioned in Section 1.3 are valuable resources to train students through
internships. Starting this year, we have made internships mandatory for students in the
summer prior to entering the senior year. This practice will serve students manifold: 1) an
opportunity to work in real industry or research environment, 2) hands-on experience, 3)
applying knowledge of chemical engineering. In the summer of 2007, an effort was made
100
to place the senior-to-be students in various internships. Of the eight students, the
placement history is as follows:
• Student #1 started working as an intern with Mittal Steel in Pennsylvania,
• Student #2 is working with the Suffolk County Water Authority of Long Island, New
York,
• Student #3 works with Koehler Industries in Bohemia, Long Island, New York. He is
developing test instrumentation for Petroleum and biomass applications.
• Student #4 is working with one of the faculty at Brookhaven National Laboratory
(BNL). Research Topic: Biodiesel production and characterization.
• Student #5 applied and received a prestigious DOE sponsored Summer
Undergraduate Laboratory Internship (SULI) to work at BNL.
• Student #6 applied to the Battelle Fellowship, another highly competitive fellowship
administered for work to be carried out at BNL.
We are very pleased with this placement record. For students, this experience is
invaluable and makes it even more enticing because these are paid internships. The
faculty as a whole has been negotiating with various industry and other research
institutions for hiring our graduates next year as interns (see more details below in
Section 6.3- Faculty Interaction with Industry). Overall, the internship experience directly
prepares our students in engineering practice.
5.4.2 Freshman and Sophomore Years
In the freshman and sophomore years, students predominantly take courses to
complete many of the foundational science, math and chemistry requirements of the
curriculum. Two specific CME courses are taken during this time.
CME 101
This course is designed to provide an introduction for all students, even those that are not
yet in the program, to chemical engineering profession. Students are introduced to the
many facets of chemical engineering through a series of invited lectures from chemical
engineers who have already reached prominence in different fields. The students are
asked to research what the challenges are in each area and decide which field would be
best for them and what education pathway is needed to achieve this career goal.
CME304
Students enrolled in CME304 will have developed the skills to perform process
calculations using the 1st and 2nd Laws of Thermodynamics for the determination of
changes of thermodynamic states in open and closed thermodynamic systems using the
concepts of internal energy, enthalpy, work, heat transfer and entropy. They will be able
to use equations of state and generalized correlations to compute the volumetric
properties of pure substances under any conditions of pressure and temperature. They
will be able to perform calculations to determine the quantity of heat transfer needed to
heat pure substances in order to react at elevated temperatures. They will be able to
determine the heat requirements for industrial chemical reactions under a variety of
conditions. They will be able to use the concept of entropy generation rates to determine
power losses for real industrial processes. They will be able to interpret empirical Tables
of material properties for use in process applications.
5.4.3 Junior Year
101
CME 310
In this course students learn operating principles of the main components and devices that
are used in chemical engineering research and industrial plants. They acquire hands-on
experience in measurement, analysis, and reporting techniques. Students also apply their
fundamental knowledge of thermodynamics, fluid mechanics, and heat transfer to unit
operations in performing 10 experiments. Students will learn about the operating
characteristics of individual components and learn to design increasingly more complex
systems using engineering principles regarding heat and mass transfer, reactions, and
separation concepts covered in the core curriculum. Students also learn to apply the
analytical software studied in CME 315 for statistical error analysis of their data.
Students are required to pass a safety examination in laboratory hazards and chemical
waste disposal prior to beginning this course. Preparation for this examination is provided
by the university Environmental Health and Safety Department, which offers a two-hour
preparatory session. Throughout this course safety procedures are emphasized in all
systems design and implementation.
CME 312
This is one of the foundation courses of Chemical Engineering. This course prepares
students in acquiring skills necessary to conduct materials and energy balance on
chemical processes. Students first learn the fundamentals of different unit operations and
steps to achieve materials balance on them. Students then perform energy balance on
systems and both material and energy balances are then integrated. This allows student
to grasp fundamentals and the course concludes with introduction to materials and energy
balances on complex systems such as methanol synthesis and polymerization reaction,
the two large volume products.
CME 314
Students enrolled in CME314 will have developed the skills to perform calculations of
the complete thermodynamic properties as a function of P.V.T. of pure homogeneous
phases using residual properties, equations of state and generalized correlations. They
will be able to relate the properties of thermodynamic functions to measurable properties
of the system using Maxwell Relations. They will be able to compute the thermodynamic
properties of two phase systems. They will be able to estimate the thermodynamic
property variations of pure substances using published thermodynamic diagrams.
Students will be able to evaluate thermodynamic behavior of fluid flow through
converging & diverging nozzles, pipes, diffusers, expanders, compressors, throttles, and
ejectors. Students will be able to evaluate the thermodynamic performance of steam
power plants, gas and steam turbines, internal combustion engines, jet engines and
rockets in terms of power production and efficiency. Since air conditioning is critical to
the preservation of foods and maintenance of buildings, students will learn how to
evaluate the thermal performance of refrigerators, heat pumps and cooling and heating
systems. Since liquefied gases are important to fuel transport, and separation processes,
students will learn how to calculate the thermodynamic performance of gas liquefaction
systems. Processes such as distillation, absorption, and extraction require an
understanding of two-phase systems. Students will develop an ability to perform
DEWPOINT, BUBBLEPOINT and K-Value calculations of vapor-liquid equilibrium as a
function of T and P in order to evaluate the behavior of multi-phase systems. Since the
chemical, pharmaceutical and pharmaceutical industries involve the use of multi-
component systems to produce useful products, students will develop an ability to
102
perform thermodynamic calculations for mixing, separation and transfer of species from
one phase to another, using concepts such as the chemical potential, VLE models and
fugacity coefficients.
CME 315
This course provides students with an opportunity to critically analyze experimental data
and to develop engineering models by integrating a variety of computer-based programs:
(i) Error analysis of experimental data; (ii) Plotting and fitting for experimental data, (iii)
Solving numerical equations; (iv) Process simulation for typical chemical engineering
processes (unit operation, distillation, etc.)
CME 318
The main objective of CME 318 is to introduce students to concepts in fluid mechanics as
they relate to common chemical engineering applications. In order to study fluid
mechanics, students must be firmly grounded in the fundamentals of both fluid statics as
well as fluid dynamics. The approach of using mass, momentum and mechanical energy
balances is used to describe flow problems and their solutions.
CME 320
Students build upon their experience in CME310 and conduct four experiments where a
certain amount of independent research is involved. The experiments are;
CONTINUOUS UNIT: GAS PERMEABILITY, CONFORMAL NANOCOATING OF
NANOPARTICLES BY LAYER DEPOSITION IN A FLUIDIZED BED REACTOR,
FLAME RETARDANT NANOCOMPOSITE FORMULATION, Batch process:
Sonochemical synthesis of Fisher Trop catalysts and polymer support.
CME 322
This course aims to introduce students to the basic concepts of heat and mass transfer for
solving chemical engineering problems. Students are taught the fundamentals of heat
transfer due to conduction, convection and radiation exchange, and the use of
conservation of energy law to solve many heat transfer problems. Students are able to
point out differences between thermodynamics and heat transfer. This course also covers
the basic concepts of mass transfer so that students are able to discover common ground
between mass and heat transfer.
CME 323
Fundamentals of chemical kinetics (for homogeneous and heterogeneous reactions, both
catalyzed and uncatalyzed) in order to be used for reactor design. This course applies the
concepts of reaction rate, stoichiometry and equilibrium to reacting systems. The
information obtained from kinetics is a means to determine how to design the appropriate
reactor. Several types of reactors are described (batch reactor, continuous-flow stirred
tank reactor, plug-flow reactor, and laminar-flow reactor).
CME 327
The course is designed to introduce chemical engineering students to different molecular
simulation techniques. Emphasis will be placed on Monte Carlo methods and Molecular
Dynamics simulation methods. This course will also cover Statistical Mechanics for
complex systems and introduce the concepts of ensembles, partition functions and
thermodynamic averages. Students will be taught the advantages and drawbacks of
simulations. They will be taught error analysis and how to both interpret their data as well
103
as compare their results to other simulations and experiments. The course is structured
around a series of projects that will culminate in a final project in which the students have
to develop their own code to solve a simple chemical engineering problem.
5.4.4 Senior Year
CME 401
Fundamentals of separations in all three phases (gas, solid, liquid) are described in a
mixture of different phases or as a pure phase. Standard classical and advanced separation
methods are introduced. The different mechanisms of separation such as separation by
phase creation, by phase addition, by barrier, by addition of solid particles or solid agents,
by external field or gradient are presented as well as the principles of large-scale
component separation operations. Different techniques of separation are precisely
described: absorption and stripping, distillation, membrane separation, adsorption, ion
exchange, chromatography, filtration and centrifugation.
CME 402
Separation Technologies II Narrative The main objective of CME 402 is to introduce
students to advanced separation methods for application to modern-day chemical
engineering problems. Students are taught separation technologies as related to a plant
design. Separation processes such as distillation, absorption and stripping are reviewed.
Other topics include single equilibrium stages, flash, cascades, packed tower design,
membrane separation (filtration) and chromatography.
CME 410
Students research a research topic, and together with course instructor and UPD, select an
advisor and a thesis committee. The student, together with the advisor, draft a course of
preliminary experiments, and the student presents a written thesis proposal , with an oral
defense to his/her committee.
CME 420
If the proposal is approved the student, under the supervision of his\her advisor continues
the research on the senior thesis plan. The student then writes the senior thesis, submits it
to the committee and defends it orally. Acceptance of the thesis by the committee is a
requirement for graduation. Students are judged on creativity and originality. They are
also strongly encouraged to produce work which can be published in a refereed journal
and presented at a national conference.
CME 440
The senior design sequence starts in the fall semester of the senior year with the first
course (CME 440). Students can perform this course in two ways;
A. Students select a project where they design an operating system that they will use in
performing their senior thesis research project. This course requires the students to utilize
knowledge gathered in all CME courses as well as the prerequisites (math, chemistry, and
physics) in the preceding three years. In CME 440 the students research the design
elements and have the necessary components build in the machine/glass/electronic shops.
In CME441 the students assemble the unit and establish its principals of operation. Some
examples of design project currently under consideration:
104
1. Electro-spinning injection device for producing cross linked nano-fibers.
2. Magnetic chamber for protein film deposition in the under the control of electro-
magnetic fields.
3. Chamber for measuring the emissions of polymer nanocomposite combustions.
4. Gas manifold for differential gas separation across engineered nanoporous membranes.
Students can also select a project is intended to let the student experience the workings of
a modern plant.
The course content follows the sequence:
• Students are divided into teams that consist of 2-3 members. The team size is kept
small to ensure each student takes on enough responsibility while experiencing
teamwork environment.
• Students select a project that is of interest to industry or relevant to their research
projects.
• The selected project is modularized and students learn the workings of each module.
• Each team then identifies the advantages and disadvantages of the selected process.
• Each team submits a progress report along the way, to show their strategy to move the
project forward.
• The course outcome is a final report at the end of the semester.
The final report is intended to reflect a students’ understanding of the working knowledge
of the process.
CME 441
While in CME 440, the students learn the basic concepts of a modern process plant, the
students continue with their project in CME 441 with emphasis on making
improvements. These improvements are driven by Sustainability and hence process
efficiency and waste minimization. Students retain their team members who started the
CME 440 project. The key features that are mandatory for incorporation into the design
project are as follows:
• Process Improvements. Each team must demonstrate their chemical engineering skills
by suggesting original process improvements and incorporating them into the existing
plant design.
• Safety and Health. Incorporation of all necessary safety features throughout the plant
as per OSHA standards.
• Waste Minimization. Waste minimization is emphasized to increase process
efficiency and byproduct minimization.
• Costing and Specifications. Each team prepares a detailed table that shows parts cost,
manufacturer and parts specifications as per ASTM standards.
• Operating Manual. Students must prepare an operating manual after all design
changes have been incorporated.
• Flow-sheet Preparation. Each team then develops a flow sheet of their improved
design by using VISIO program.
The course requires the following:
105
• Submission of at least two interim reports for feedback by the instructor.
• Each member then submits a Final Report.
• Each team then makes a joint Oral presentation, each member emphasizing their
contribution to the project. The oral presentation is made to the graduate students and
select faculty.
• Students present actual test results of the unit they constructed at the URECA
conference for undergraduate achievements at Stony Brook.
The final flow sheet is designed to be open ended. We are now implementing ASPEN
PLUS software to complete the Economic analysis of the plant.
CME 470
This course is concerned with chemistry and methods of polymer production. Students
will gain a general knowledge of the purification, preparation and storage of monomers,
initiators, chain transfer agents, etc. The main part of the course deals with the
mechanisms and kinetics of addition polymerization, condensation polymerization, ring-
opening polymerization and co-polymerization as well as polymer modification. Students
will learn the effect of stereospecificity and monomer reactivity on (co-)polymer
configuration and composition. Emphasis will be put on main synthetic techniques such
as bulk, solution, and heterogeneous polymerization. Methods of separation and analysis
of polymers will be discussed in context of polymer manufacture.
5.5 Incorporating Design Content throughout the Curriculum
5.5.1 Freshman and Sophomore Years
CME304
This semester , there were no design components in 2007 but a design component will be
added 2008 in which students will be asked to look at various options for power
production and perform tradeoffs amongst various options. In addition, students will be
asked to design a reactor give a set of requirements for the reactor performance.
5.5.2 Junior Year
CME 310
Students are required to design an experiment starting with a process flow diagram. Then
they will select the appropriate instrumentation and apparatus, modify standard
equipment according to particular constraints, and perform an efficiency analysis on the
complete system.
CME 312
Students learn to perform Materials and Energy balance around a unit operation for both
reactive and non-reactive systems throughout the course. The concept of unit operation in
specific processes is introduced multiple times during the course to enable students to
grasp the fundamental concept of design. The course culminates with students reviewing
and understanding the complex design of commercial operating plants for production of
commodity chemicals such as methanol and polymers.
CME 314
106
This semester, there were no design components in 2007 but a design component will be
added 2008 in which students will be asked to look at various options for power
production and perform tradeoffs amongst various options. In addition, students will be
asked to design a reactor given a set of requirements for the reactor performance.
CME 315
Students are able to simulate simple chemical engineering processes by using a
computer-based application and learn how to optimize the processes. Students are also
able to develop mathematical modeling which is required for designing of chemical
engineering processes.
CME 318
This course emphasizes the design components when discussing unit operations that
involve, for example, fluid-moving equipment and flow rate determination.
CME320
Students perform four experiments wich require prior design of the experimental process
and apparatus. Before each experiment, the students must submit a flow chart of the
experimental process they propose to use and a design of the corresponding system they
will operate.
CME 322
Students are taught the basic concepts of heat exchangers that are widely used in many
chemical engineering processes. Students are asked to design a heat exchanger based on
performance parameters for assessing the efficacy of a heat exchanger.
CME 323
Chemical kinetics is used as a tool for reactor design in chemical reaction engineering
(rational design and/or analysis of performance of chemical reactors). The design
includes the determination of the type, size, configuration, cost and operating conditions
(safety, environmental considerations, maintenance) of the reactor.
5.5.3 Senior Year
CME 401
Design of separation operations (choice of separation technique, number of stages) are
based on specific requirements (such as product purity, and cost) when both molecular
and bulk thermodynamic and transport properties are considered.
CME 402
This course emphasizes the design components when discussing all processes. More
specifically, students must understand the design of a separation unit in a chemical
engineering process.
CME 440
This is the first part of the two-part capstone design course in which students utilize their
cumulative knowledge acquired in the preceding CME courses that emphasize process
design. A detailed sequence of steps that students follow in their design project is already
discussed in detail in the preceding section (Section 5.4.1- Professional Component).
107
Students design the entire process; perform cost/environmental impact analysis, and
submit drawing for the components to be built.
CME 441
This course follows the Part I (CME 440) design sequence with major emphasis on
process design. Students work project of their selection but must go through a series of
steps to develop a design flowsheet with original improvements. A detailed description of
this course is given in Section 5.4.1- Professional Component. Students gain thorough
understanding of commercial process design in this course.
5.6 Incorporating Engineering Standards and Realistic Constraints
Engineering standards are addressed in a number of courses at all levels of the
curriculum. They include:
5.6.1 Freshman and Sophomore Years
CME101
Professional in different fields of chemical engineering are invited to lecture to the
students and discuss the problems, challenges and standards of their field. Students are
then required to submit a short essay each week where they analyze the speakers
presentation and discuss the challenges posed in achieving the standards of his/her field.
CME 304
Realistic engineering constraints are incorporated into the text, lecture notes and
homework problems in which typical engineering conditions are encountered.
5.6.2 Junior Year
CME 310
Students will learn the engineering standards for threads, materials and types of
connections used in this field, as well as safety and economical requirements. Student
learn where to look up national and international standards for different procedures, as
well as health and safety standards and information (i.e. MSDS, ISO, ASTM , UL94, etc)
CME 312
Students are taught to understand the challenges practicing chemical engineers face as
more emphasis is placed on health and environmental controls in unit operations.
Students learn to incorporate waste processing streams and other environmental controls
during materials and energy balance exercises with case studies discussed in class.
CME 314
Realistic engineering constrains are incorporated into the text, lecture notes and HW
problems in which typical engineering conditions are encountered.
CME 315
Students can manage computer files and information using Windows operated systems.
Students can plot experimental data and fit them with appropriate functions. Students can
solve numerical calculus and equations for chemical engineering processes and
phenomena.
108
CME 318
As the course progresses, students are taught how the solutions to various engineering
applications must also take into account the economic, health & safety, environmental,
regulatory, and manufacturability considerations
CME320
Students are asked to determine whether their experimental design complies with
designated standards for the procedures used. In each case, prior to experimentation,
MSDS sheets must be provided for all materials, and discussion of compliance with
standard safety protocols in each process must be discussed. Students compare the
procedures and operation design against industry standard protocols for each experiment,
and discuss the significance of their results in relative to national standards.
5.6.3 Senior Year
CME 402
As the course progresses, students are taught how the solutions to various engineering
applications must also take into account the economic, health & safety, environmental,
regulatory, and manufacturability considerations.
CME 440
Students are asked to learn engineering standards in existing process flow sheets as they
work to identify limits and disadvantages of their selected commercial process. Students
also identify realistic process constraints as they assess additional costs of incorporating
engineering standards. Students must identify process design limitations based on
parameters that include engineering standards.
CME 441
The course teaches students the ultimate process design that incorporates specs of the
latest regulatory health and environmental standards, both local and federal. Among the
crucial standards students pay attention to are American Society for Testing and
Materials (ASTM) to spec parts such as pressure tubing and fittings, etc. and adding
environmental controls and safety features to effluent streams to meet the Occupational
Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) standards. Students must consider these and
other aspects while constructing their process flow sheet with process improvements.
Students learn the ultimate test of their flow sheet design by considering registration
under the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), a standard the plant must
go through to compete in the global economy.
CME 470
Commercial-scale production parameters that govern polymerization rate, polymer
molecular weight, molecular weight distribution, and polymer chain structure (such as
branching and cross-linking) will be considered with respect to engineering standards and
realistic engineering constraints.
109
5.7 Incorporating Communication Skills
5.7.1 Freshman and Sophomore Years
CME 101
Students learn proper communication skills first, by listening to professional in chemical
engineering who present lectures on different topics of interest, and then providing a
written analysis of their presentations. The students are also asked to write a short term
paper providing a detailed analysis of a specific field in chemical engineering and
presenting a power point presentation to the class on the standards and criteria required to
work in that field.
CME 304
Currently students are offered an optional Recitation Section in which they are free to ask
questions and make comments on any aspect of the course.
CME 327
Students present their final project and results in a PowerPoint presentation. The
presentation is graded.
5.7.2 Junior Year
CME 310
Students will work in teams and collaborate in all activities of the class. They will need to
be aware of group members’ decisions in the development of an experiment and
constructively criticize and help each other. Completion of each experiment ends with a
discussion of its results. Each student is required to select one experiment and do an oral
presentation, as if he/she were presenting the results at a national conference. The
students are required to discuss their individual contribution and their partners
contribution in the experiment.
CME 314
Currently students are offered an optional Recitation Section in which they are free to ask
questions and comment on any aspect of the course
CME 318
Students demonstrate a level of effectiveness expected by employers when they deliver
oral presentations and submit written reports for the semester project. The students have
presented their work to guests from industry, as invited by Professor Calvo. The students
work in pairs, which also fosters teamwork.
CME320
Students work in teams of two or three on small research project. Each student is required
to select a project for oral presentation on behalf of his/her team, at a mock conference,
at the end of the semester. Students learn to present groups work and provide proper
credit for each group participant. The students also assume the role of session chair at
these “conferences”.
CME 323
Students are encouraged to participate during the class: questions, comments, corrections
of homework (board).
110
5.7.3 Senior Year
CME 401
Students are encouraged to participate during the class: questions comments correction of
homework (board) 15-minute presentation on a specific separation technique used in
industry and applied to a commercialized product.
CME 402
Students demonstrate a level of effectiveness expected by employers when they deliver
oral presentations and submit written reports for the semester project. The students have
presented their work to guests from industry, as invited by Professor Calvo. The students
work in pairs, which also fosters teamwork.
CME 410
Students research a topic for their senior thesis, write a thesis proposal, and defend it
orally to their thesis committee.
CME 420
Students perform extensive research on the proposals approved in CME410. Submit a
senior thesis, which is graded by their thesis committee, and defend the thesis to the
committee in an oral presentation. Passing this course is a requirement of graduation.
Students are also encouraged to present their work at the URECA conference on
undergraduate achievements at the university and to enter the student research
competition at the AIChE conference.
CME 440/CME 441
Students work in teams to understand existing process design. An integral part of this
design sequence is to be an effective communicator to lead a team and understand the
process design. Students first learn to communicate their findings through in-0class
discussions followed by final oral presentations and effective written reports. Design
projects are entered for presentation at the URECA student achievement conference.
Students can also enter design projects in the student research competition at the AIChE
undergraduate conference.
CME 470
Students are required to use current scientific publications to prepare term reports and
presentations about new synthetic techniques and polymers. They will also discuss these
presentations in class using the theoretical knowledge obtained during the course.
5.8 Incorporating Ethics
5.8.1 Freshman and Sophomore Years
CME 101
The students discuss ethical dilemmas that can arise in the workplace. Different scenarios
are explored where the student plays the part of an employee who is torn between
disclosing irregular and unsafe practices at his company while at the same time fears
losing his job. The ethics of properly reporting work accomplished in a team setting is
also explored in this course. Students must analyze and discuss the short and long term
impact of different chemical engineering fields, and the ethical dilemmas which can
potentially arise in the long term versus short term cost/profit analysis.
111
5.8.2 Junior Year
CME 310
Engineering ethics are discussed regarding ensuring safety in design, compliance with
safety and environmental standards, reporting uncertainty in experimental results, and the
sharing responsibility in a group project.
CME 312
Students are taught materials and energy balance problems on unit operations. But in-
class discussion centers on environmental problems and upcoming regulations as they
relate to safety and health of workers. Students are then asked to make decisions based on
cost cutting that may threaten safety of their fellow workers versus implementing new
regulations that are expensive. The in-class discussions introduce students to ethical and
professional responsibility.
CME 318
Ethics is discussed in class as a direct result of the elaboration from a specific industrial
problem or an example from the text. Questions by the students are encouraged, and all
of the discussion regarding ethics is based on Professor Calvo’s years of industrial
experience. The subject of ethics involves such topics as patent infringement, reverse
engineering, confidentiality, harassment, fairness/respect for colleagues, safety, and
acceptance of responsibility.
CME320
Student work in groups and the ethics of group projects are discussed in great detail. The
students learn to make clear distinctions between the individual and the group effort and
to provide proper credit in each case. Student learn the ethics of presenting project on
behalf of a group and the proper method for emphasizing their original contribution
within a group setting.
CME 327
Students are taught the proper way to present data (by correctly identifying any
extraneous data points, not omitting data points, presenting correct error analyses)
5.8.3 Senior Year
CME 402
Ethics is discussed in class as a direct result of the elaboration from a specific industrial
problem or an example from the text. Questions by the students are encouraged, and all
of the discussion regarding ethics is based on Professor Calvo’s years of industrial
experience. The subject of ethics involves such topics as patent infringement, reverse
engineering, confidentiality, harassment, fairness/respect for colleagues, safety, and
acceptance of responsibility.
CME 410 / CME420
Student performs original research and learns the ethics of presenting original data and
proving proper credit for previous work. Students also learn how to file for patents and
protect their IP, while respecting the IP of others. Special emphasis is made on
compliance with safety standards ethics of proper reporting ,waste disposal, and
environmental impact of their research.
112
CME 440 and CME 441
Students are required to provide a detailed analysis of compliance of their design with
published safety protocols and standards, i.e. MSDS, OSHA . Discussion of the ethical
responsibility in the process design as modern day plants is emphasized. Students are
made aware of sometime corporate pressures to improve the bottom line by risking safety
controls and using marginal or inferior materials and cut personnel to reduce cost.
Students must also analyze the IP implications of their design. They learn to protect their
IP, while respecting that of others, through an IP analysis of their designing project, i.e.
they must be aware of prior patents and licensing, and filing a disclosure of their own
invention.
CME 470
Engineering ethics will be discussed during the course with emphasis on safety and
environmental issues to provide students with an understanding of major concerns and
their solutions in the production of polymers.
5.9 Participation in Engineering Societies
The students are all encouraged to become student members of the AIChE. The students
attended the annual AIChE conference for the second straight year and have entered into
their research presentation competition. Next year the CME Club will become an official
student branch of the AIChE student network, which requires a one-year probationary
period for new programs.
The faculty in the program are all members of AIChE, ACS and/or MRS. (M.
Rafailovich is a fellow of the APS, and Devinder Mahajan is a member of the Russian
Academy of Natural Sciences (RANS).
5.10 Fundamentals of Engineering Exam
As stated in Section 3.5.6, the subject of the FE/PE exam was brought up at CME Club
meetings by faculty to assess students’ interest in taking the exam. (See CME Club
minutes dated February 7, 2007.) The students were largely unaware of the test. When
this fact was brought up at a UPC meeting, it was decided to invite a speaker to the next
CME Club meeting who could discuss the importance of the test, the subject matter
tested, registration details, etc. (See UPC minutes dated February 12, 2007.)
The speaker we invited was Frank Szalajda, a water treatment specialist, who recently
passed the PE exam in Chemical Engineering. (See CME Club minutes dated February
21, 2007.) Frank was then recruited to teach the FE preparatory course and discuss with
the students the requirements for taking the PE exam after graduation.
We are in the process of instituting the FE Exam as an outcome-measuring tool to see
how well our students are versed in the skills they are expected to have when they
graduate. The first test to be used will take place in spring 08. Sitting for the FE exam is
now a requirement for graduation.
113
6. Faculty
Stony Brook University is a highly ranked public research university, and the CME
faculty maintains active and interdisciplinary research programs that relate to the
Chemical Engineering profession. In the fiscal year ending 30 June 2007, the cumulative
research expenditures were over $2,073,580. The CME faculty/undergraduate student
interaction is best gauged by the presentations and co-authorships of the participating
undergraduate CME students. Though the number of papers co-authored by the CME
undergraduates is small at present due to the lead time required for pub;ication in refereed
journals, it is likely to increase in coming years as the annual publication data become
available.
See Appendix D for more in-depth faculty background information.
f6.1 Size of Faculty
The Chemical and Molecular Engineering program has 2 crossover faculty members who
teach in both the Engineering Science program and the CME program. One faculty
member is a full professor involved in polymers while the other is an associate professor
involved in modeling. We also have 2 tenure-track assistant professor faculty members –
one in Tissue Engineering, and one in green chemistry - who teach CME classes
exclusively. In addition we have 2 crossover part-time lecturers who teach both ESG and
CME classes, as well as a University Instructional Specialist who is responsible for lab
maintenance and teaches two CME classes. One additional faculty member at the rank of
full professor who works in the area of alternative fuels will be hired in the CME
program starting in Fall ’07.
Our current total CME undergraduate enrollment stands at 23. Faculty teaching load is
typically two to four courses per year (graduate and undergraduate).
6.2 Faculty Interaction with Students
As stated earlier in Section 1.4 student advising is presently handled in a two-tier fashion.
The Assistant to the Chair serves as the first line of inquiry for students. She is available
at any time on any day of the week. Students come to her on an as-needed basis, and she
handles matters concerning: general requirements for admission to the major; lifting
registration blocks; prerequisite substitutions; technical elective alternatives; scheduling
coordination for those off grid, etc. For more complex problems, she advises students to
make appointments with either of the co-Undergraduate Program Directors. These
problems include: formal admission into the major; transferring credits from other
institutions; prerequisite substitutions, and other non-standard issues concerning courses
in the eight-semester grid. .
As the program expands with students enrollment increase more faculty will be hired.
This will allow each student admitted to the CME major to eventually be assigned a
faculty advisor- this job presently is handled by the two Undergarduate Program Co-
Directors. It is mandatory that the advisor is consulted prior to registration for every
academic year and will be available for discussion at any time during the hours posted
outside Room 314 in the Old Engineering Building. Students are encouraged to discuss
with their advisors any academic matters pertaining to their studies at Stony Book.
Information on assigned advisors will be obtained in the Department office, Room 314,
Old Engineering Building
114
6.3 Faculty Interaction with Industry
6.3.1 Individual Faculty Interaction
The Chemical Engineering programs in universities throughout the nation has
traditionally served various sectors of the American industry by providing a pipeline of
graduates. Such industry has become diverse as traditional areas of manufacturing are
more demanding due to new environmental regulations and new thrust areas open up.
The aging population and dwindling supplies of petroleum have put emphasis on
pharmaceuticals, food, biotechnology, nanotechnology, unconventional petroleum and
renewable energy sectors. These market-driven areas were factored in when the new
CME program came into existence at Stony Brook in 2004. Consequently, the emphasis
of the CME program is to train students who can make seamless transitions to both
traditional as well as upcoming industry after graduation. From the very beginning of the
program, it was realized that an interdisciplinary faculty was required who could then
train the CME graduates with state-of-the-art skills to balance thes high-demand areas.
The present make-up of the CME faculty, though small at present, reflects this
commitment (see Appendix D for Faculty Resumes). The faculty keeps itself in the
forefront of their areas of expertise by working closely with industry in two ways. First,
projects funded through industry, whether direct or joint with government, allows the
faculty to work on current problems of interest to industry. Second, the faculty lends their
expertise to industry through consulting. The faculty/industry interaction has helped the
CME program two-fold:
• Place several CME students in summer and semester interships (See Section 5.4.1 for
students placed for 2007 Summer Internships).
• Several companies are developing lomg-term relationship with the CME program by
offering to provide internship opportunities on regular basis.
Described below are specific examples of the CME faculty interaction with industry.
Professor Dilip Gersappe has worked with companies in the petrochemical field and with
start-up companies that do numerical modeling for chemical, automotive and
pharmaceutical companies. He has been funded by the Mitsubishi Chemical Company,
Japan, Japan Polychem Corporation. He currently is working on projects for RES Group
Inc, a company that specializes in developing numerical engines for solution of advanced
chemical reaction kinetics and software for the pharmaceutical industry. His interaction
with industry has benefited the courses he teaches, primarily ESM 369 Polymers and
CME 312 Molecular modeling, as he can use examples from real industrial problems in
class.
Professor Tadanori Koga has been working with ExxonMobil Corporation since 2000
for x-ray and neutron scattering programs at National Synchrotron Light Source (NSLS,
Upton, NY) and National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST, Gaithersburg,
MD). Through this collaboration he has established an environmentally benign and low-
temperature process for creating membranes for selective gas separation and low-density,
low-dielectric constant (k), and metalizable polymer films for microelectronics. His
active interaction with ExxonMobil will be beneficial to the CME students in the CME
310 (Lab) course in which the students are able to acquire a highly valued skill and
knowledge to characterize nanometer scale structures using x-ray scattering at NSLS. At
115
the same time, since 2005, he has been interacting with Freescale Semiconductor, Texas
Instruments, and IBM for creating low-k polymer films through his current research fund
from a semiconductor research corporation.
Professor Devinder Mahajan has historically worked with petroleum, renewable energy,
and Environment-related companies. His work in synthesis gas conversion and fuel
desulfurization was funded by Amoco corporation (now British Petroleum), Chevron,
Inc. and Texaco, Inc., both as cost-shared and direct funding from industry. At present, he
is working with Schlumberger Doll Research and Chevron, Inc. on oil and gas related
problems; Caithness, Inc. and Advanced Ceramics Research, Inc. on geothermal energy;
ConocoPhillips, and several small companies on biofuels. He also actively consults with
several small companies on Renewable Energy related topics. Professor Mahajan’s
interaction with industry has been beneficial to the CME students in the following taught
course: 1) Materials and Energy Balance (CME 312) in which actual plants are cited as
case histories, Design (CME 440/CME 441) in which energy producing unit design are
the subject and Directed Research (CME 420) includes work on crucial topics such as
Fischer-Tropsch (F-T) and Methane Hydrates. As the CME Co-Director, Professor
Mahajan has placed several CME students in internship positions in various companies
such as Koehler, New York; Mittal Steel Industries, Pennsylvania, to name a few.
Professor Nadine Pernodet is actively collaborating with on several projects. Notable
ongoing projects include: 1) A project with Clinique Makeup R&D division on studying
the influence of TiO2 nanoparticles on human dermal fibroblasts in which the effect of
nanoscale particles on cells as TiO2 nanoparticles that are largely used in sunscreen lotion
(for their ability to reflect and scatter UV radiation) and make up products (as a pigment,
and opacifier); 2) A project with Estee Lauder Corporation on skin mechanics at the
macroscale and the cellular level as a function of age: relation between the extracellular
matrix formation and the aging process. According to the “glycation hypothesis”,
accumulation of Advanced Glycation End-Products (AGEs) alters the structural
properties of tissues, and this will be related to protein composition, organization and
mechanical properties as a function of age.
Professor Miriam Rafailovich has had long standing collaborations with many industries
in the petrochemical field and in polymers with whom she has joint patents. In her
capacity as the CME Co-Director, she has placed many of her students in positions with
industries and has arranged internships for the CME undergraduates in companies such as
Estee Lauder, Pall Corporation, Exxon-Mobil, to name a few.
Below is the CME part-time faculty with an impressive record of working with industry.
Dr. William J. Calvo has over twelve years of full-time industrial experience as a
chemical engineer. Currently a Senior Product Developer for Pall Corporation (East
Hills, NY), he has been responsible for scientific development and coordination of
improved blood filtration technologies. Prior to joining Pall, he was Principal Scientist
for Multisorb Technologies in Buffalo, NY where he was involved in desiccant
manufacturing and product development. Before that he held a post-doctoral appointment
at the Toshiba Stroke Research Center at SUNY at Buffalo and was a research fellow at
the Cleveland Clinic Foundation. His industrial experience further includes five years at
Eastman Kodak Company in both Research & Development and Process Engineering.
116
During that time he was involved in film emulsion manufacturing technology, pilot plant
scale-up and moisture movement characterization for specific packaging applications.
Professor Calvo’s industrial experience has been clearly invaluable in teaching the
courses of Fluid Mechanics (CME 318) and Separation Technologies (CME 402).
Dr. Al Tobin worked at Grumman Corporation, Union Carbide and Nuclear Metals for
more than 32 years before joining the SUNYSB faculty in 1999. His industrial
experience, related to the development of fusion energy, nuclear energy and advanced
materials development for energy systems, is an asset to the Thermodynamic courses
(CME 304 and CME 314) he has taught, where students learn to utilize thermodynamic
ideas to analyze the flow of energy in industrial systems.
Dr. Vladimir Zaitsev has worked at biotechnology and medical supply companies in the
past. Recently he was working on SPIR projects funded by a start-up company that was
interested in high temperature polymer coatings and electroforming of optical parts for
optical applications. Another collaborative project was an automatization and scale-up of
the developed technologies. Current interaction with industry includes a development of
optical fiber based sensors for Fiber Instrument Sales, Inc. and improvement of warfare
agents and explosives detection for Lockheed–Martin and Northrop-Grumman
companies. Dr. Zaitsev’s industrial experience is beneficial to the CME students in the
following courses: Chemical and Molecular Engineering Lab (CME 310) and Polymer
Synthesis (CME 470).
The Faculty/Industry interaction translates positively into the classroom. Such interaction
will allow the CME students to be well-versed in industrial problems of interest and make
them competitively seek employment in the private sector.
6.3.2 External Advisory Board (EAB)Members from Industry
Three members of the External Advisory Board are from industry. These are:
Saied Tousi, Senior Vice President, Pall Corporation
Dennis Peiffer, Senior Scientist, ExxonMobil Research & Engineering Company
Daniel Maes, Vice President, Estee Lauder
The CME faculty meets with the entire EAB board once a year to get their input for our
program and to have them assess whether or not our students have the skills necessary to
succeed in industry. For more information on the EAB board members, see Appendix H.
6.3.3 Strategic Partnership for Industrial Resurgence (SPIR)
Since the establishment of SPIR by the State of New York July 1994, Stony
Brook University's College of Engineering and Applied Sciences (CEAS) has played a
critical role in the program's effort to revitalize New York State industry. The SPIR
program has worked, under the aegis of the Center for Advanced Technical Assistance
which is directed by Dr Clive R. Clayton, Leading Professor of Materials Science and
Engineering, toward creating alliances among companies within the Long Island region
and throughout New York State. The students and faculty have worked in partnership
with corporate engineers and scientists to ensure that New York gains the technological
edge to increase market share and develop new highly paid jobs. The SPIR program
works with small and start-up companies, including companies in the University’s Long
117
Island High Tech Incubator. The SPIR program also represents an important mechanism
for the development of high quality industrial internships for the undergraduate students,
providing those students with an opportunity to gain experience in the engineering work-
force. In the last 10 years Stony Brook's SPIR program has worked with over 330 New
York State companies on 1828 projects, potentially creating, according to our industrial
partners, an estimated 8,347 new jobs and preventing some 2,222 layoffs. In recognition
of these efforts and the potential for even greater accomplishments, Stony Brook SPIR, in
partnership with industry, has, since its inception been awarded in excess of $95 million
in Federal funding. This success strongly indicates the maturity and depth of commitment
of the university-industry partnership that has developed at Stony Brook University
following the establishment of the New York SPIR program. Finally a major outcome of
the SPIR program has been the very high retention rate of our students by companies who
often offer permanent employment opportunities in our region following graduation.
SPIR creates high quality student internships with small, high technology companies. So
in addition to the industrial internship opportunities arranged directly through the CME
faculty members (discussed in Section 6.3.1) for the CME undergraduates, internship
opportunities are also provided by the College of Engineering and Applied Science
(CEAS) that houses the SPIR program.
6.4 Competence of Faculty
All CME faculty members maintain active research programs and perform cutting-edge
research. The breadth of the programs is reflected in the interdisciplinary nature of
research that is being carried out.
6.4.1. Research Component
Crossover Full Professor
Miriam Rafailovich
Professor Rafailovich is the director of an interdisciplinary NSF center for the Polymers
at Engineered Interfaces. This center specializes in polymer nanocomposites, polymer
thin film coatings, flame retardant nanocomposites, supercritical fluid processing, and
biomateirals/tissue engineering constructs. The center is an NSF pilot project for the
seamless integration of research with education.
Crossover Associate Professor
Dilip Gersappe
Ph.D. 1992, Northwestern University
Studying statistical mechanics and computer modeling of complex chemical systems is at
the heart of Dilip Gersappe’s research. He investigates the behavior of self-assembling
polymeric and biopolymeric systems, and is developing theories for the properties of
polymer blends and the behavior of polymers at surfaces and interfaces. In recent work,
Gersappe has used mean field theories to determine the effect of confinement on the
properties of thin film polymer blends. In other work, he has used molecular dynamics
simulations to isolate the molecular mechanisms of failure in polymeric adhesives.
Currently, he is developing parallel molecular dynamics techniques to study the
strengthening mechanisms in polymer nanocomposites and to investigate the factors that
control the permeability of polymeric membranes.
CME Assistant Professor
Tadanori Koga
118
Ph.D., 1998, Kyushu University. Japan
His research interest is the development of “green” energy, manufacturing and
processing: (i) green nanofabrication of polymer thin films using supercritical carbon
dioxide, (ii) chemical recycling of waste plastic using supercritical water, and (iii)
methane hydrate as a future energy resource. The key for these projects lies in the
development of rational design strategies. For this purpose, he has been integrating a
variety of in-situ and real-time x-ray/neutron/light scattering techniques for both
surface/interface and bulk/solution structure analysis at synchrotron/neutron scattering
facilities including the National Synchrotron Light Source (NSLS, Upton), Advanced
Photon Source (APS, Argonne), and National Institute of Standards and Technology
(NIST, Gaithersburg).
As further applications of in-situ and real-time observation, he also focuses on self-
assembling processes of soft matter systems (polymers, colloids, gels, membranes, etc.)
under various external stimulants for achieving a fundamental understanding of the
targeted phenomena and bringing the concept into future commercial applications.
CME Assistant Professor
Nadine Pernodet
At the interface between chemistry, physics, materials science and biology, my research
is based on the effects of surfaces on protein organizations and cell behaviors, relevant to
tissue engineering, but also on the effects of nanostructures (drug delivery) to living
organisms.
- By controlling surface properties (such as chemistry, topography…) and designing
surfaces and patterns, the molecular response relative to protein organization and cellular
response are followed in order to explore the structure of protein molecules related to the
functioning of a cell, the growth and regeneration of tissue. The control of protein
organization gives a powerful tool to reproduce and construct the natural extracellular
matrix. By identifying normal extracellular matrix behavior on a surface and determining
the importance of protein fibers orientation and mechanics relative to cell functions, my
ultimate goal is to be able to reverse (for example, aging process) or ultimately cure some
pathologies (such as diabetes, lack of blood clotting), and in direct application for tissue
engineering. Biomineralization of proteins is closely associated to protein assembly and
organization as well, and is investigated in relation to bone formation.
- Finally, another area of my research is to characterize the impact of nanostructures on
cell behavior and functions, to define a safe size range of nanoparticles in order to fully
benefit from the nanotechnological advancements and also to specifically target certain
types of cells in order to reach efficient drug delivery.
Part-Time Lecturer
William Calvo
Dr. Bill Calvo is Senior Product Developer for Pall Corporation based in East Hills, NY.
For three years, he has been responsible for the scientific development and the
coordination of improved existing and new blood filter technologies to meet specific
customer needs. His recent work includes the redesigning of existing filter technologies
for apheresis devices thereby aiding customers with filter-assisted leukocyte removal
assessments.
Prior to joining Pall, he was Principal Scientist for Multisorb Technologies in Buffalo,
NY. Before that he held a post-doctoral appointment at the Toshiba Stroke Research
Center at SUNY at Buffalo and was a research fellow at the Cleveland Clinic Foundation.
119
His industrial experience further includes five years at Eastman Kodak Company in both
R&D and Process Engineering. During that time, he was involved in film emulsion
manufacturing technology, pilot plant scale-up and moisture movement characterization
for specific packaging applications.
He has received numerous honors including Tau Beta Pi (Engineering), Omega Chi
Epsilon (Chemical Engineering), and Sigma Xi (Research). He is a member of the
American Institute of Chemical Engineers and the National Society of Professional
Engineers.
Calvo holds a Bachelor’s degree in Chemical Engineering with honors from Manhattan
College (Riverdale, NY), a Masters in Chemical Engineering from the University of
Pittsburgh and a Ph.D. in Chemical Engineering from SUNY at Buffalo.
Part-Time Lecturer
Al Tobin
Dr. Al Tobin received his B.S. in Chemical Engineering, Masters in Metallurgy from
MIT and his Ph.D. in Metallurgy from Columbia University (1968). He worked 30 yrs as
a Senior Staff Scientist at Grumman Corporation in Bethpage where he performed
research studies on a wide variety of aerospace and energy related materials-based
programs. His 75 published research papers include studies of ultra-lightweight
structural materials , fracture and fatigue in high temperature titanium alloys for
hypersonic vehicles, metal matrix composites, plasma-wall interactions in materials for
first wall in fusion reactors, development of cryopumping materials for He in fusion
reactors, oxidation resistant coatings, ceramic to metal joining, growth of diamond films
from vapor phase, development of lightweight re-usable thermal protection systems for
the Space Shuttle, contamination effects in space satellites, high temperature materials for
space propulsion, fracture in PZT-materials for smart sensors, and evaluation of process
models for pyrolysis in ceramic-matrix composites for gas turbine engines. He holds 5
US patents.
Since his retirement from Grumman in 1999, Al has been an Assistant Adjunct Professor
at SUNYSB where he has been teaching both undergraduate and graduate courses in
thermodynamics of materials, chemical engineering thermodynamics, composite
materials, kinetics of phase transformations, manufacturing, ceramics and glass, and
engineering responses to society.
University Instructional Specialist
Vladimir Zaitsev
Ph.D.: Moscow State University, 1992.
Dr. Zaitsev’s interests include synthesis, applications, and analytical methods of polymer
materials in addition to my teaching responsibilities. If you want to be a real chemical
engineer, I can help you to develop the required skills and acquire valuable knowledge
you will need in your future career. I am going to share with you my experience, which
includes the development of a protein purification pilot unit at a biotechnology
corporation, the invention of an assay for analytical and biomedical applications, the
design and production of polymeric implants at an ophthalmologic hospital, improvement
of high temperature polymer coating of optical elements and electroplating process
adaptation for SPIR project, preparation of biocompatible nanomaterials, and creation of
sensors for detection of explosives and toxic substances. I will teach you how to use
general lab equipment such as spectrophotometers and chromatographs as well as
120
advanced modern techniques such as mass-spectrometry. I expect your hard work and
valuable input will benefit all of us - students, faculty, department, and university.
CME Full Professor (to start F07)
Devinder Mahajan
Professor Mahajan holds a joint appointment between Brookhaven National Laboratory
and SUNY at Stony Brook. Dr. Mahajan’s professional goal is to bridge science and
technology for the benefit of mankind. To achieve this goal, his research interests focus
on Energy issues that includes a portfolio of projects on Methane hydrates, H2
production, Fuel Cells, Fischer-Tropsch, Methanol, and mixed alcohol synthesis using
soluble (single-site) or slurry (nano heterogeneous or colloidal phase) based catalysts. He
has organized symposia and international workshops on issues such as Clean Fuels,
Methane Hydrates, and Biomass and serves as a Guest Editor of three special volumes:
Topics In Catalysis (TIC), Journal of Petroleum Science & Engineering (JOPSE), and
Industrial Engineering and Chemistry Research (I&ECR). He serves on several national
and international energy-related committees and consults and lectures on clean energy
topics. In 2006, he was recognized with a membership to the Russian Academy of
Natural Sciences (RANS)-US Section and the RANS Crown and Eagle Medal of Honor
for service to the field of “Petroleum Engineering”. He is a member of the American
Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE), the American Chemical Society (ACS), and the
New York Academy of Sciences (NYAS). As a Professor at Stony Brook, his priority is
to further integrate education and research at both undergraduate and graduate level,
foster collaboration within the university with a goal to train students in the next-
generation energy technologies.
6.4.2. Research Funding
The faculty members of the CME program all have active research programs with
substantial funding, as illustrated in the figure below. The faculty can therefore sponsor
students for their senior theses projects, as well as internships, and summer research. The
research programs are all internationally recognized and allow students to experience the
excitement of science at the cutting edge. Furthermore, all researchers have extensive
collaborations with either industrial or national laboratories, both in the US and abroad,
which further enhance and broaden the students’ research experiences.
121
CME Research Expenditures
$2,500,000
$2,000,000
$1,500,000
Indirect
Direct
$1,000,000
$500,000
$0
2004 2005 2006 2007
Figure B6.1 CME Research Expenditures
7. Facilities
7.1 Classrooms
The University assigns classrooms for all courses each semester. The classrooms are
adequate to meet the needs of the students. Every classroom is equipped with overhead
projectors, screens, and blackboards. In larger classrooms, microphones and LCD
projectors are also provided. The University has gone through a major increase in the
undergraduate enrollment. This increase has strained the University resources. Though
classroom space is tight and must be allocated some six months in advance, it has been
adequate for our needs, except for the absence of the Internet access. Only classrooms in
the Engineering Quad have internet access at this time. There are plans for the campus to
install wireless communications in all buildings in the near future that will bring live
instructional resources in classrooms.
7.2 Libraries
The Science and Engineering Library at the University occupies two floors, with
additional resources including ample desks for student studying, internet access, copy and
duplication facilities, and professional assistance. Of particular interest is the
commitment the library has made to electronic resource materials, including online
journals and handbooks, provisions and resources for access to educational websites,
workshops that describe library facilities, and continual updates to the software
infrastructure. For example, within the past two years the library completely revamped its
electronic catalog systems, STARS, resulting in substantial improvements in its
capability, ease of use, and speed. The interlibrary loan program though a bit slow, works
122
well. One area in which the library is lacking in past years has been the number of paper-
based research journals that it carries, though this impact is less of a concern for
undergraduate education. Furthermore, the advent of electronic journals has mitigated
this issue somewhat.
7.3 Computing Facilities
Chemical Engineering Computer (CEC) laboratory:
In addition to various SINC sites available in the University for all students, the College
currently supports two Computer Aided Design laboratories that are used by CME
students. These laboratories are located in Rooms 112 and 236A of the Old Engineering
Building. In the Laboratory for Sensors and Instrumentation, there are 16 dedicated PCs
with the National Instrument (NI) Labview 6.1 Software installed, of which 12 of them
are fully equipped with the NI Data Acquisition System. The Chemical and Molecular
Engineering courses CME 315 and 323 use this laboratory for instructional purposes.
The undergraduate program utilizes the College of Engineering and Applied Sciences 20
station PC-based computer laboratory with server and computer projection equipment.
The computers are currently equipped with LabView, AutoCAD 2004, Minitab,
Mathematica, MSVisio, Photoshop, and Microsoft Office. Recently we also obtained
from Prof. Th. F. Weisner the software for the Virtual Unit Operation Laboratory, which
was developed under a grant form the Camille and Henry Dreyfus Foundation at Texas
Tech University to simulate large scale unit operation processes. This software is used as
part of the curriculum in CME315 where student learn computer based statistical data
analysis, and chemical engineering computer calculations. The VUOL software
(described in The Development and Deployment of a Virtual Unit Ops Laboratory,
Sreeram Vaidyanath, Jason Williams, Marcus Hilliard, and Theodore Wiesner, Chemical
Engineering Education, 41, 144, 2007) is used to teach students modeling of unit
operation processes involving Heat Exchange, Separation, or Reaction Engineering.
All Chemical and Molecular Engineering faculty have high-speed internet access in their
offices and laboratories and the computers and software to make good use of that access.
7.4 Laboratories
Laboratory facilities may be divided into two categories: departmental facilities
(including research laboratories in which many of our undergraduates work in research
teams or as interns); and college facilities (including available computer facilities, etc.).
Departmental Facilities:
Chemical and Molecular Engineering laboratory
The laboratory contains a wide variety of equipment for specifically for chemical
engineering experiments with computers interfacing and control. Chemical Engineering
Lab I: Unit Operation and Fundamentals, Chemical Engineering Lab II: Chemical and
Molecular Engineering as well as CME 410/420, Undergraduate thesis research:
Chemical Engineering Lab III: Directed Research I, Chemical Engineering Lab IV
Directed Research II. The Undergraduate Chemical and Molecular Engineering
Laboratory located in the Heavy Engineering Building (Room 254) is financially
supported by the Dean’s office which provides annual funds for new and replacement
123
equipment. Equipment donations from local industry and research labs have also
substantially added to the facility.
The lab contains a variety of advanced equipment which is used by students as part of the
Unit Operation/ Process Control and Chemical and Molecular Engineering Laboratory
experiments listed in the appendix. This equipment is very versatile and is constantly
being reconfigured as more laboratory modules are being designed for the students. The
equipment listed may occasionally be more advanced than warranted for introductory
unit operation laboratory. On the other hand, it was selected so that the students gain
experience on actual research grade instrumentation which they will use in the work
place or in designing advanced research projects, in their senior year or graduate school.
• 1600 Series FTIR Infrared Spectrophotometer
• Autosystem GC Gas Chromatograph
• GTC8500 Gas Chromatograph
• HP5890 Series II Gas Chromatograph
• HP 5890A GC Gas Chromatograph
• 5965A Infrared Detector
• HP7694 HeadSpace Sampler
• 452HC High Pressure Reactor
• 4836 Temperature Controller
• 510 HPLC Pumps
• 996 Photodiode Array Detector
• 486 Tunable Absorbance Detector
• 430 Conductivity Detector
• 490 Programmable Multiwavelength Detector
• 717plus Autosampler
• 712 WISP Autosampler
• Hydrogen Generator
• Nitrox UHP Nitrogen Generator
• Model 655F Isoterm Oven
• Series 7000 Ultrasonic Generator
• TGA/SDTA851 Thermo Gravimetric Analyzer
• DSC821 Differential Scanning Calorimeter
• Stellarnet Fiber Optic UV-VIS Spectrophotometer
• MT Analytical Balance
• MT Microbalance
• Workstations with National Instruments Digital Interface Boards
• Headway Photo Resist Spinner
• Rudolph Ellisometer
• UL-94 V0 Combustion Test Chamber
• Walk-In Fume Hood
The advantage of being housed in the Materials Science department is that our CME
undergraduate students also have access to state-of-the-art materials engineering
facilities, which enhance our program.
124
Engineering Science laboratory (http://www.matscieng.sunysb.edu/esg312/)
The facility contains ample equipment needed to provide instruction in the areas of safety
(instructional videos and presentations on laser and radiation training), literature search/
engineering library orientation (computers with internet connection and state of the art
software networked to a central printer; access to EJournals, online ASTM Standards;
etc.); mechanical measurement/ statistical analysis (vernier calipers, micrometers, digital
voltmeters, meter sticks, and laser measuring devices; Microsoft Excel, SAS- Statistical
Analysis Software; etc.); birefringent materials/ photoelastic measurements (digital
cameras, polariscopes, etc.); interference/ diffraction (helium neon lasers, power meters,
etc.); mechanical properties/ truss analysis (hand tools; joints and members for Howe,
Pratt, and Warren Bridge Constructions; and truss analysis software); optical microscopy/
image analysis (stereo, biological, and metallurgical microscopes); thermometry (optical
pyrometers, infrared pyrometers, thermometers, thermocouples, etc.); Material Properties
(annealing ovens, ASTM grain size comparison charts); Oscilloscopy (oscilloscopes,
function generators, counters, cables, fiberoptics, tuning forks, etc.); and Fluid Dynamics
(hydrometers, scales, graduated cylinders, manifold, venturi pumps, regulators, etc.).
Electron Microscopy laboratory:
(http://www.matscieng.sunysb.edu/materialscharac1.html)
The electron microscopy facility of the Department of Materials Science and Engineering
(used often in the undergraduate education mission) is a full-access user facility that hosts
a state-of-the-art Schottky Field Emission Scanning Electron Microscope equipped with
EDAX detector and software for microanalysis, and with EBSD capabilities for non
destructive electron diffraction analysis of bulk samples. There is also a Philips CM 12
Transmission Electron Microscope with a LaB6 filament operating at 120kV which is
equipped with EDS analysis and Parallel-reading Electron Energy Loss Spectroscopy
capabilities.
Mechanical testing laboratory: (http://www.matscieng.sunysb.edu/MTL/)
Contains a wide variety of equipment for testing material properties (including strength,
hardness, ductility, wear resistance, fatigue and fracture toughness) and equipment for
optical analysis and computer interfacing of test equipment. The laboratory has Instron
8500 system plus Universal Tester; an Instron Model 1000 Tester; an ATS Model 1101
Tester; Measurement Group System 5000 Strain Gage System; MISTRAS Acoustic
Emission System; Hommel T1000 Profilometer; Wilson/Tukon S200 Microhardness
Tester; Mitutoyo Macrohardness Tester; Wilson Rockwell Tester; Fatigue Dynamics
Fatigue Tester; Riehle Impact Tester; EG&G Model 363 Potentiostat/Galvanostat; 1100C
Box Furnace; and Sony ExwaveHAD CCD camera
Research Instrumentation:
With proper training the students also have access to the following equipment that is
resident in individual research laboratories of Materials Science and Chemical
Engineering Faculty: (http://www.matscieng.sunysb.edu/facilities.html)
• DPV 2000 In-Flight Particle Pyrometer
• Control Vision™ Nano-Pulsed Laser Strobe (In-Flight Particle Imaging)
125
• Simultaneous Thermal Analyzer (Netzsch Jupiter) for DTA, DSC, TG, FTIR
Measurement
• Dilatometer (Netzsh) for Thermal Expansivity
• Holometrix for Thermal Conductivity
• Four-Point Electrical Resistivity Probe
• HP 4294A Impedance Analyzer
• BET Surface Area Analyzer
• Tribological Equipment
• Computerized Friction and Wear Tester
• Solid Particle and Cavitation Erosion
• Dry Sand Abrasion Tester
• Depth Sensing Indenter for Determining Yield Strength, Young's Modulus and
Strain Hardening Coefficients
• ZYGO 3-D Optical Non-Contact Profilometer
• Buehler Polishing Systems
• Isomet Precision Saws
• Philips X-Ray Generator, Diffractometer and Laue
• Microfocus X-Ray Diffractometer
• Air, Inert and Vacuum Furnaces
• BNL/ NSLS / PRT X27A – Computed Microtomography*
• Environmental Stress Rupture Tester**
• Diagnostics Facility for Graded Coatings
• Leica Spectral TCS SP Confocal Microscope
• Custom-designed laser confocal microscopy and topographic mapping system
capable of analyzing large area samples (up to several inches in diameter) with
associated image processing software.
• LifeAFM Sensing Mode Atomic Force Microscope
• Digital Nanoscope III AFM
• Topometrix Thermo-SPM.
• Nicolet Magna-IR 760 E.S.P. optical bench spectrometer
• Nicolet 760 FTIR spectrometer for mid- and far- range infrared analysis with
multiple sampling accessories for surface and diffuse reflectance, and is equipped
with a state-of-the-art Continuum IR microscope. The microscope is equipped
with optics for diffuse reflectance microspectroscopy, diamond crystal ATR
microspectroscopy, and a unique grazing angle objective for thin film analysis
• Atomika 3000-30 SIMS
• Temperature Controlled Contact Angle Goniometer
• Rudolph Ellipsometer
• 1500X Olympus Nomarski Microscope
• Photoresist spinners
• KSV Langmuir trough
• Philips CM12 STEM is equipped with a high brightness (LaB6) electron gun,
energy dispersive x-ray spectrometer, and parallel electron energy loss
spectrometer, TV recording, and LN cooled and straining stages.
• Reichert Ultramicrotome
• Cambridge Stereoscan 260 SEM
126
• LEO 1550 SFEG/SEM+EBSP+EDS (High Brightness, EDAX/EDS system, thin
window, EDAX/TSL/EBSP system, electron diffraction, X-ray mapping, Phase-
ID, Absorbed current imaging, Robinson back-scatter detector, Standard SE/ET
detector, In-lens detector, In-situ IR camera
• Philips CM12 scanning transmission electron microscope (high brightness (LaB6)
electron gun, ultra-thin window energy dispersive x-ray spectrometer, parallel
electron energy loss spectrometer, TV recording system, A variety of specimen
stages
• Two Gatan Dual Ion Mills.
• Various optical microscopes and digital/still cameras.
• UHV vacuum systems for thin-film deposition: Ion/TSP/Turbo pumped, Ion
Gauge controller, Dual DC-Magnetron Sputter Sources, Optical Pyrometers,
Quartz Microbalance
• HV vacuum systems for thin-film deposition: 3 e-beam source, Ion Gauge
controller, RF-Magnetron Sputter Source, Thermal Source, Thickness monitor
• Carbon/gold coater
• Darkroom
• Chemistry Room
• Polishing Room
• Instron 8500 plus Universal Tester
• Instron Model 1000 Tester
• Measurement Group System 5000 Strain Gage System
• MISTRAS Acoustic Emission System
• Hommel T1000 Profilometer
• Wilson/Tukon S200 Microhardness Tester
• Mitutoyo Macrohardness Tester
• Wilson Rockwell Tester
• Dynamics Fatigue Tester
• Riehle Impact Tester
• Tmi Impact Tester
• G&G Model 363 Potentiostat/Galvanostat
• 1100C Box Furnace
• Three electron spectrometers, all having variable angle X-ray Photoelectron
Spectroscopy (XPS) capabilities and two equipped to perform sub-micron spot
Auger Electron Spectroscopy and chemical mapping.
• Static SIMS (Ga metal ion gun with a spot size of 0.2 microns to allow chemical
mapping of surfaces with a detection level approaching the ppm range for many
species)
• UV-VIS spectrometer system for liquid or reflection measurements
• Atomic absorption spectrometer equipped with a graphite furnace for enhanced
elemental sensitivity.
• High vacuum chamber for femtosecond Ti-sapphire laser ablation for film
deposition and profiling for chemical analysis.
• Three potentiostats capable of nA range current measurement
• Electrochemical impedance and noise analysis systems.
• Controlled atmosphere glove boxes
127
College of Engineering and Applied Sciences facilities:
The College of Engineering has two recently acquired Rapid Prototyping systems,
including a DTM Sinterstation 2500Plus, which are used with are available to students in
all CEAS design courses (i.e. CME 440/441). The College also maintains a fully
equipped machine shop with CNC and standard machinist equipment for a wide variety
of materials. Services of a Glass Shop, Electronic Service Office, and Welding Facility
are also available through arrangement with the physics and chemistry departments who
manage these facilities and have a per hour service charge arrangement with the rest of
the university. The University maintains a series of available computer sites (“SINC
sites”) throughout the campus, with one large student facility available in the Engineering
Building.
Classroom space is shared space for lectures and recitations and is shared with the rest of
the University. Each classroom is equipped with a video projector and screen and
whiteboards, maintained by the Office of Instructional Services of the University. A room
is available in the Javits lecture center with video/DVD presentation capabilities for
showing videos, and laptop computers/computer projection systems are available for
borrowing from the Audio-Visual office in the lecture center (http://
www.javits.sunysb.edu) for use anywhere on campus. The Department also maintains
one computer projection unit, a portable TV/VCR system, and has access to video
conferencing facilities.
7.5 Equipment and instrumentation installed in laboratory
7.5.1 TO BE PURCHASED: EQUIPMENT AND COST
1. High Pressure Generator System.
The high pressure generator system is configurable setup that can be purchased from
HIP as separate parts. This allows a customer to build a system according to
application. All listed parts will be connected into a single system that will deliver
supercritical carbon dioxide for lab experiments in the chemical engineering lab.
Additional parts from Cole-Parmer are needed to connect the generator to pressurized
gas cylinders.
128
Item Supplier Model Qnt. Price
High Pressure Generator, 5,000 psi, 1/8” HIP 87-6-5 1 1,083.00
TS connector
2-way valve HIP 15-11AF2 3 255.90
Cross HIP 15-24AF2 1 48.60
Union Coupling HIP 15-21AF2HM4 1 44.00
Tubing 1/8" O.D HIP 15-9A2 50’ 220.00
Ball Check Valve HIP 15-41AF2 2 169.20
Line Filters, 0.5 mkm HIP 15-51AF2 1 119.00
Safety Head HIP 15-63AF2 1 114.50
Rupture Disk, 2,500 psi HIP Rapture Disk 2 55.60
Adapter 1/8” TSF-1/4” HM HIP 15-21AF2HM4 1 35.90
Adapter ¼”NPT-1/8” TS HIP 15-21NFBAM2 2 67.60
Pressure Gauge, 5,000 psi HIP 4PG5 1 246.00
Gland, 1/8” HIP 15-2AM2 25 110.00
Sleeve HIP 15-2A 25 77.50
Analytical Gas Regulator, H2 Cole Parmer K98201-32 1 376.00
Analytical Gas Regulator, N2 Cole Parmer K98201-42 1 376.00
Analytical Gas Regulator, CO2 Cole Parmer K-03270-10 1 460.00
Pressure Transducers, 3000 psig, 0.13% Cole-Parmer K-68074-18 1 195.00
error, 5V
Total 4053.80
2. The permeability experiment is based on published experimental setup. The
estimated price of the complete custom-order system is about $20,000. The list
represents the cost of the system separate parts that will be connected together and
serve as a single complete experimental setup in the chemical engineering lab.
Item Supplier Model Qnt. Total Price
Gas flow controller, 10 sccm Cole-Parmer K-32661-00 2 1880.00
Gas flow controller, 50 sccm Cole-Parmer K-32661-04 1 940.00
Gas controller cable Cole-Parmer K-32662-65 2 90.00
Gas controller power supply Cole-Parmer K-32662-50 2 120.00
Pressure Transducers, 25 psi, 0.13% Cole-Parmer K-68074-08 2 390.00
error, 5V
Differential Pressure Transducer, 15 psid, Cole-Parmer K-68111-34 1 427.00
5V
Two-Way Valve SS ¼” Cole Parmer K-98165-88 4 340.00
Thermocouple, J, pipe fitting Cole-Parmer K-08517-71 4 128.00
Tubing 316 SS ¼”, 2x3’ Cole-Parmer K03300-10 2 102.50
Male Tee 1/4'”x NPTM, SS316 Cole-Parmer K31406-06 2 29.00
Union Tee, ¼”, SS316 Cole-Parmer K31406-18 4 80.00
Adapter, ¼” x ¼”NPTM, SS316 Cole-Parmer K31406-35 4 27.00
Adapter, ¼” x ½”NPTM, SS316 Cole-Parmer K31406-37 2 23.00
Total: 4576.50
129
3. Digital Computer Interfaces:
The interfaces will be used to connect experimental setups to computers.
Item Supplier Model Qnt. Total Price
NI USB-6009 Student Kit National Instrument 779321-22 3 807.00
USB-6000 Series Accessory National Instrument 779511-01 2 58.00
USB-6008/09 Accessory Kit National Instrument 779371-01 2 58.00
USB-9211A 4-ch Thermocouple National Instrument 779436-01 2 898.00
Input Module
Total: 1821.00
4. Spectrophotometer:
Item Supplier Model Qnt. Total Price
UV VIS spectrophotometer StellarNet Inc EPP2000Cs 1 3,445.00
5. Light Source:
The setup includes light source, cuvette holder, and optical fibers with connectors to
connect light source to cuvette holder.
Item Supplier Model Qnt. Total Price
UV-VIS Light Source StellarNet Inc EPP2000Cs 1 2,580.00
6. Balances:
Item Supplier Model Qnt. Price
MT Analytical Balance Mettler Toledo AB265_SDU 1 2,479.00
MT Toploading Balance Mettler Toledo PB3002SDR/FACT 1 947.00
Vibration Damping Mounts Cole-Parmer EW-01019-35 1 579.00
4005.00
130
7.5.2 EQUIPMENT ALREADY INSTALLED
Date Vendor Description Qnt Source Lab
09/2006 Perkin Elmer 1600 Series FTIR Infrared 1 KeySpan HE254
Spectrophotometer
09/2006 Perkin Elmer Autosystem GC Gas 1 KeySpan HE254
Chromatograph
09/2006 Perkin Elmer GTC8500 Gas Chromatograph 1 KeySpan HE254
09/2006 Hewlett 5965A Infrared Detector 1 KeySpan HE254
Packard
09/2006 Hewlett HP7694 HeadSpace Sampler 1 KeySpan HE254
Packard
09/2006 Hewlett HP5890 Series II Gas 1 KeySpan HE254
Packard Chromatograph
09/2006 Hewlett HP 5890A GC Gas 1 KeySpan HE254
Packard Chromatograph
09/2006 Parr 452HC High Pressure Cell 1 CAES HE254
Instrument
09/2006 Parr 4836 Temperature Controller 1 CAES HE254
09/2006 Corning PC-500 Hot Plate 5 KeySpan HE254
05/2006 Waters 510 HPLC Pump 4 Sikorsky HE254
Aircraft
05/2006 Waters 996 Photodiode Aray Detector 1 Sikorsky HE254
Aircraft
05/2006 Waters 717plus Autosampler 1 Sikorsky HE254
Aircraft
05/2006 Waters 486 Tunable Absorbance 1 Sikorsky HE254
Detector Aircraft
05/2006 Waters 430 Conductivity Detector 1 Sikorsky HE254
Aircraft
05/2006 Waters 712 WISP Autosampler 1 Sikorsky HE254
Aircraft
05/2006 Waters 490 Programmable 1 Sikorsky HE254
Multiwavelength Detector Aircraft
08/2006 Zumark BenchMate Workstation 1 KeySpan HE254
08/2006 Whatman Hydrogen Generator 1 KeySpan HE254
08/2006 Dominick Nitrox UHP Nitrogen Generator 1 KeySpan HE254
Hunter
08/2006 Fisher Model 655F Isoterm Oven 1 KeySpan HE254
Scientific
08/2006 Branson Series 7000 Ultrasonic 1 KeySpan HE254
Generator
08/2006 VWR Model 1166 Water Bath 1 KeySpan HE254
08/2006 Tekmar Model 2055 Water Bath 1 KeySpan HE254
02/2007 Mettler TGA/SDTA851 Thermo 1 CAES HE254
Toledo Gravimetric Analyzer
05/2007 Mettler DSC 821 Differencial Scanning 1 CAES HE254
Toledo Calorimeter
131
7.6 Critical Needs
Unit Operation and Chemical Engineering Laboratory needs to obtain additional
engineering instrumentation and hardware to develop variety of unit operation
experiments. The unit operation setups will be upgraded and extended according to
available funding from CAES. Critical needs list includes
• National Instrument Digital Interface cards
• positive displacement liquid pumps
• pressure transducers
• vacuum pump
• tubular heaters
• reactor vessels
• photochemical reactors
• ultrasound generator
• HPLC columns
• HPLC injectors
• chemical engineering simulation software
7.7 Continuous Update and Development of Instructional Laboratories
The Facilities Committee meets to discuss necessary changes in chemical engineering
laboratories according to current trends in nanotechnology and biomedical
manufacturing. New unit operation experiments will be designed using expertise of our
partners such as Pall Corporation. The program receives ~$40k/ year for laboratory
equipment. We plan to upgrade our online monitoring sensors with online ThermoStar
mass analyzing detector. One of the major purchases will be continuous distillation unit.
In order to provide our students with modern instrumentation for CHE383/384 course we
plan to purchase new FTIR and UV-VIS spectrophotometers and gas chromatographs.
7.8. Provisions for Maintaining and Servicing Laboratory Equipment
Additional requests for services and for repairs of existing equipment are forwarded to
the college. Due to the age of donated equipment there is a dire need to have service
plans and regular maintenance of the chemical engineering laboratory equipment.
7.8.1 List of laboratory experiments for CME 310 and 320
The laboratory sequence for the program is built as follows:
The students first gain experience in laboratory science through the foundation courses of
physics and chemistry where they learn the fundamental principles.
The first CME laboratory is CME 310 where they perform the ten experiments described
below. In this course they learn how to design and set up unit operation systems from the
individual fittings and components. The course dovetails with the simulation course CME
315 and experimentally tests many concepts that the students learned in the other CME
courses, such as gas permeability through a membrane, nanocomposite compounding,
Rayleigh criterion for fluid flow, etc.
In CME 320 the students perform four experiments, listed below, which are of increasing
difficulty. In CME 410 the students begin to explore original research under the
132
supervision of a faculty mentor. The students select a supervisory committee and write
their thesis proposal. The proposal is defended orally and if the student passes, he can
begin experiments on his senior thesis project.
Some examples of senior thesis projects are:
1. Engineering Flame Retardant Polymer Nanocomposites
2. A batch process for the production of Pt nanoparticles for Enhanced Hydrogen Storage
3. Electro-spinning, cross-linked polymer hydrogels
4. Unit operation for synthesis and extrusion of magnetic polymer nanocomposites
The papers that the students write on these topics contain original research that can form
the basis of a publication in a refereed journal.
The design sequence, CME 440 and CME 441 can be connected to the research done in
CME 410 and CME 420.
For example, in the case of the Pt nanoparticles project, the student also designs the
pressure chamber where the synthesis reaction takes place and where he is able to control
the size of the particles by pressure and temperature during synthesis. The pressure
chamber is then also used for hydrogenation of the particles used in the fuel cells.
The project which involves electro spinning requires the design and construction of a
continuous process apparatus capable of simultaneous injection of a metered amount of
cross linker together with resin. As part of the CME440/441 sequence the student will
design a computer controlled dual syringe injection system where the timing of the
injection, the injection voltage, the cross linker/polymer ratio can all be controlled
remotely. This system will then be used as part of CME 410/420 where the student will
research the optimal parameters for the synthesis of electrospun nanocomposite fibers of
different mechanical properties. This too is an original work which, if properly executed,
can be published in a refereed journal.
The students involved in these projects will be encouraged to present their work at the
MRS conference in Boston this fall and later at the AIChE student symposium. The
design projects will be entered at the URECA undergraduate project fair. In this manner
the students will also be exposed to participation in professional conferences and
publications which encourage lifelong learning and a broad perspective of the chemical
engineering discipline.
The laboratory write-ups for the first two semesters of the lab sequence are listed in the
following sections. No write-ups are supplied for CME 410/420. Instead the students are
expected to develop an independent research plan together with their advisors.
(See Section J in the Appendix for the list of CME 310 and 320 lab experiments.)
133
8. Institutional Support and Financial Resources
In the table below we summarize the financial support provided by the institution for
operation of the program, which does not include staff. We do not as yet have a budget
for the 07-08 academic year, but we expect a similar amount to that in 06-07.
Table I-5 Support Expenditures
Fiscal Year 1 2 3 4
(prior to (previous (current (year
previous year) year) of
year) visit)
Expenditure Category 04-05 05-06 06-07 07-08
Operations1 $0 $0 $8,090
(not including staff)
Travel2 $0 $0 $4,000
Equipment3 $0 $0 $41,500
Institutional Funds $0 $0
Grants and Gifts4 $0 $0
Graduate Teaching $0 $0 $6332
Assistants
Part-time Assistance5 $0 $0 $0
(other than teaching)
8.1 Institutional Support, Financial Resources, and Leadership
Institutional support is in the form of salary for Dr. Vladimir Zaitsev (University
Instructional Specialist) who is in charge of setting up the laboratories. Institutional
support was also provided for Professor Mahajan to travel to Baltimore, MD to obtain
ABET training and for Professor Nadine Pernodet, Professor Tadanori Koga and two
undergraduate students to attend the undergraduate AIChE research conference in
Boston.
Library facilities are available through the CEAS library and librarian, Godlind Johnson.
The CEAS Undergraduate Student Office is responsible for providing student advising.
We also have access to an electrician, Frank Berger, and a college machinist, Lester
Orlick. There is also a building manager, Robert Martin, who constitutes the facilities
support.
134
The college has a computer SINC site, a computer specialist Yersson Gaona, who has
assisted us in setting up the computer courses, and a computer classroom with multi-
media projection capability and a remote conferencing site.
The CME Club receives funding from the university for food and publication materials.
8.2 Budget Process
The budget outlined in the table above is mostly for operations. Laboratory equipment
was purchased with a grant of $40K from the university.
In addition to this source, the program also received donated equipment from KeySpan
and Sikorsky Aircraft companies.
As we built up the program, funding was also received from CEAS to hire adjunct faculty
who are qualified to teach some of the courses. These faculty members are listed in the
previous sections and they are:
Dr. William Calvo, MS and PhD Chemical Engineering, and Dr. Albert Tobin, MS,
Chemical Engineering and PhD Metallurgy. Both of these faculty members are highly
qualified instructors who have had more than a decade of industrial experience in
chemical engineering related professions.
9. Program Criteria
This section describes how the requirements of the Chemical Engineering program
criteria are met in our curriculum. Our program includes:
• A thorough grounding in chemistry - our students take two semesters of general
chemistry with an integrated laboratory experience (CHE 131+133 and CHE
132+134 or their equivalents total of 10 credits)
• A working knowledge of advanced chemistry - our students take two semesters of
organic chemistry with 2 mandatory semester of organic lab (CHE 321 and 322
total of 8 credits)
• An intermediate calculus-based freshman physics course (8 credits) [PHY
131+133 and PHY 132+134, or their equivalents], and an additional sophomore
physics (PHY 251+252 or ESG 281 4 credits)
• An advanced science course spectroscopy lab (CHE 383 and 384 5 credits)
• All students are required to take 16 credit hours (four semesters) of calculus:
o 8 credit hours of freshman calculus, ASM 151 and AMS 161 (or their
equivalents)
o 4 credit hours of multivariate differential and integral calculus, vector
algebra, and vector calculus, AMS 261 (or equivalent).
o 4 credit hours of homogeneous and inhomogeneous linear differential
equations, systems of linear differential equations; series solutions,
Laplace transforms, and Fourier series, AMS 361 (or equivalent).
• Safety and environmental aspects of CME - our students take a safety course but
are also exposed to safety and environmental issues in many of the other core
courses (particularly the design courses)
135
• Material and energy balances - our students take Material and Energy Balance
(CME 312 3 credits) which thoroughly covers this material
• Thermodynamics of physical and chemical equilibria - this material is covered in
the Chemical Engineering Thermodynamics I and II core courses (CME 304/314
6 credits)
• Heat, mass, and momentum transfer - this material is extensively covered in our
Heat and Mass Transfer and Fluid Mechanics core courses (CME 322 and CME
318 6 credits)
• Chemical reaction engineering - this material is covered in the Reaction
Engineering and Chemical Kinetics core course (CME 323 3 credits)
• Continuous and stage-wise separation operations are studied in Separations
Technologies I and II (CME 401/402 6 credits)
• Process dynamics and control - this, along with modeling and optimization, are
covered extensively in Numerical Methods and Statistical Analysis (CME 315 3
credits). Appropriate modern process simulation and computing will be done
using the state-of-the-art CEC lab, as our primary classroom allows us to make
use of modem computational techniques ranging from differential equation
solvers, to Matlab, to LabView
• Process design - this, along with product design are studied in the capstone
courses, the Design Core CME 440/441 (6 credits)
A complete description of these courses is given in the Appendix B.
10. General Advanced-Level Program
Accreditation of an advanced-level program is not being sought.
136