ME for EEs - Where Are All the ME Courses in the EE Curriculum?

An unfortunate premise is that undergraduate Electrical Engineering (EE) programs seem to be unable to accommodate within their curricula substantive Mechanical Engineering (ME) courses. Alternatively, a single course obliquely called ME for EEs, a counter to the EE for MEs course usually required in the ME program, may be necessary. This requisite course has been vetted over three semesters, directly assessed by Course Learning Outcomes (CLO) mapped to Student Outcomes (SO) and indirectly assessed by a course survey. The impact of the course on the interdisciplinary capstone design was notable and indirectly assessed by surveys and interviews. The inclusion of such a requisite ME for EEs course in the typical and crowded EE program is not as endemic as may be perceived but is indispensable to the profession. Although such an ME for EEs course has been heralded before and is not necessarily unique, consider this another clarion call for its inclusion as a requisite course in the EE program. EE and ME – Together Again? The Electrical Engineering (EE) discipline was once embellished with a significant number of Mechanical Engineering (ME) courses suitable for between-the-world-wars technical training 1 . Even as late as the 1960s EE students were required to take ME courses in statics, dynamics, materials and thermodynamics 2 . However, the rapid development of digital logic integrated circuits and the microprocessor in the 1970s shifted the extent of the EE curriculum away from these ME courses. Accelerating the shift were new topics such as microelectronics, probability and statistics, digital signal and image processing and digital communications and control. The result is that many EE programs today do not feature any required courses in ME. The dismissive comment is now often heard that “ME topics are covered in Physics, especially statics and dynamics”. This sentiment could be extended, with the same degree of irony, to “EE topics are covered in Physics, especially basic circuits and electromagnetics”. Neither of these statements is quite correct when the material and the Engineering application are compared. While the typical EE curriculum might include as many as three Engineering elective courses, the advising suggestion that may predominate is to choose only courses from the EE discipline. This is especially prevalent when preparatory courses are considered within the ME program. Although the prerequisites for an initial ME course in statics would be satisfied, an interdisciplinary course of study in ME could utilize all the remaining Engineering electives and may not be reasonable. Furthermore, although substantive, a single course in statics, often the elective or requisite alternative, does not provide any breath of understanding of the ME discipline. The relationship of the subdisciplines of EE and ME in electromechanics and energy and power in course work must go beyond the proverbial pressure is voltage, flow is current analogy. Since ME students, generally, are still required to take a single EE for MEs course and laboratory, often provided by an electrical systems service course from the ECE department, the analogy can be infused into ME courses quite naturally. The typical EE for MEs course is supported by a comprehensive text with topics that span resistive and reactive electric circuits, AC power, semiconductor and power electronics, electric machines, digital logic and instrumentation 3 . The usually corequisite laboratory provides an experience garnered from several EE laboratories for the ME student. Obviously the ME curriculum still considers that a modicum of understanding of the breath of the EE profession is required for its profession and practice. Why is it that a different opinion seems to be prevalent for the EE curriculum? Unfortunately, the reverse, the ME for EEs course in the EE curriculum, is not endemic and infusing mechanics into such EE courses as electromechnical systems, control theory and electrical power and energy conversion remains challenging. Although some EE programs have recognized this curricular deficit and have engaged their ME department colleagues to provide a service course, such a course has been only sporadically provided and often not required. A survey of peer institutions, using the predicate that the single ME for EEs course be a comprehensive upper division offering, has found that only 18 of 94 (19%) EE programs have either an elective (14) or requisite (4) course. Although the ME for EEs course is therefore not necessarily unique, consider this then as a clarion call for a widespread requisite course in mechanical systems for EE students. Undergraduate EE students without such an ME for EEs course remain at a distinct disadvantage in focused areas of employment such as electromechanical systems and energy and power. Research in Engineering education has also identified perhaps the key barrier to interdisciplinary practice 4 . Students apparently lack the ability to provide the salient connections between and understanding of the contributions of various disciplines. This should be a further concern to EE educators and would be ameliorated by the adoption of an ME for EEs course.