Background/Objectives: Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is a prevalent neuropathy often associated with repetitive wrist movements, sustained wrist postures, and external compression. Although cycling offers numerous health benefits, prolonged handlebar contact may contribute to hand/wrist discomfort and cycling-related neuropathies. As a pilot study, the aim of this work was intended to (1) evaluate the feasibility of using pressure mapping to quantify glove-related pressure redistribution during cycling; (2) identify key confounding variables requiring improved control in future studies, including comfort/discomfort, posture, cycling experience, hand position, and anthropometric variability; and (3) provide preliminary estimates of pressure variability and effect magnitude between bare hands, conventional biking gloves, and Shock·Tek™ gloves to inform a larger confirmatory study. Methods: Thirteen right-handed adults were tested during low-intensity cycling using a stationary bike equipped with a pliance^®-x pressure sensor wrapped around the handlebar under three conditions: no gloves, traditional padded gloves, and Shock·Tek™ gloves. Results: This exploratory pilot study (1) demonstrated the feasibility of using pressure mapping, (2) identified confounding variables, and (3) showed that while traditional gloves did not significantly reduce surface pressure in the projected median nerve region as we hypothesized, the Shock·Tek™ gloves yielded a 61% reduction in pressure (mean: 20.23 kPa vs. 51.96 kPa with no gloves). Conclusions: These preliminary findings suggest that glove design can influence surface pressure distribution over the projected median nerve region at the hand–glove–handlebar interface during short-duration stationary cycling.

Main Menu Session 3568 Incorporating Design in an Introduction to Dynamics Course Wendy Reffeor, Ph.D. Seymour and Esther Padnos School of Engineering Grand Valley State University Grand Rapids, MI 49504 Abstract Prompted by EC2000, a contest to design a spring-powered catapult was incorporated into the Dynamics course at Grand Valley State University. The catapult was required to launch a projectile to clear an obstacle and strike a target while not exceeding a specified ceiling. Students brain stormed design concepts, completed their design calculations, including analysis of the rigid body motion of the catapult and the motion of the projectile, and created component and assembly drawings prior to constructing their catapults. They then constructed prototypes of their designs, tested them, revised them as needed with complete documentation of changes and competed in the contest. Evaluation of the project was based upon the accuracy of the analysis of the mechanism, the consistency between the calculations and the completed mechanism, the engineering drawings of the mechanism and the conclusions drawn from the experience. This project gave students the opportunity to apply the concepts learned in a normally purely theoretical course to the design and implementation of a real, open-ended, design problem. In addition, it emphasized good design practices by encouraging students to design their catapult completely prior to building it, build, test, and modify the prototype and prove they met the design requirements. Students learned that design is an iterative process, that successful design requires careful planning and that there are many ways to solve any problem. In addition, this project offered the students a junior level, guided design experience. Introduction Design and build projects are incorporated in many of Grand Valley State University’s (GVSU) courses to present a more applied approach to engineering, while maintaining the rigor expected of engineering curricula. From these projects, students learn design procedures, reinforce their learning of design tools such as mathematical modeling programs, mechanical drawing programs and physical modeling programs, learn the value of carefully planning projects, and learn that design is an iterative process even when calculations are carefully performed. Main Menu

Session 2666 Connecting Rod Design Competition–Solid Mechanics Multiple Failur e Mode Design and Testing Pr oject Wendy Reffeor , Ph.D., David Blekhman, Ph.D. Seymour and Esther Padnos School of Engineer ing Gr and Valley State Univer sity Gr and Rapids, MI 49504 Abstract Students in Solid Mechanics courses commonly struggle with balancing multiple failure modes in a single part. To improve their understanding of failure modes, stress risers and design, students in the Solid Mechanics course are required to compete in a connecting rod design competition. As an added benefit of the project, students have an opportunity to reinforce their CAD/CAM and dimensioning skills learned in a first-year CAD/CAM design course. Working in teams of two, students designed, machined and tested a connecting rod. The pin connections in the rod were represented by two 3/8” holes 3” apart. Students were to design the geometry of the part around and between two holes. The part was to have a maximum width of 1”. Students documented their designs through design calculations and a dimensioned CAD model, generated machine codes using CAM software, machined their parts, measured their parts to ensure accuracy and tested the rods to failure using a tensile tester. Grading was based on the strength-to-weight ratio of the connecting rod, accuracy of their failure force estimate, documentation of anticipated failure forces in all possible modes of failure, dimensioned CAD drawings, quality of manufacturing and the poster used to present their designs. In the first year of the competition, the rods were machined from plastic, chosen for ease of machining. However, using plastic caused inaccuracies in determining the failure load as the stress risers reacted differently than in a less ductile material. Aluminum was chosen as the material for the second year of the project. More than 30 teams participated in the contest the first year and 29 in the second. Testing results for the failure load were within 45% plastic and 21% for aluminum rods. Student comments were very positive both about the design experience and their understanding of the concepts incorporated in the project. The project quite effectively achieved the primary goal of helping students understand multiple failure modes and stress risers in axially loaded members. It also reinforced student design, CAD/CAM, dimensioning and machining skills. Introduction The old saying, "A picture is worth a thousand words," is a contemporary pedagogical reality. While looking at a picture is passive, an experiment would be an active learning exercise worth Proceedings of the 2004 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition Copyright © 2004, American Society for Engineering Education

Main Menu Session 1566 Incorporating Experimental Design in a Mechanics of Materials Course Wendy Reffeor, Ph.D., Jeffrey L. Ray, Ph.D. Seymour and Esther Padnos School of Engineering Grand Valley State University Grand Rapids, MI 49504 Abstract A necessary part of any engineering design is the development of specifications that define its function. Once these specifications are developed, testing of that design to ensure it meets the design specifications is essential. At Grand Valley State University, we have incorporated design and build projects into most of our engineering courses, including the Mechanics of Material Course. In addition to design and build, in the Mechanics of Materials course, students are required to develop their own design specifications and design an experiment to test their apparatus. Students were presented with the challenge of creating a combined loading apparatus which models a real situation or to test a real product to determine the stresses incurred by that product in normal use. Strain rosettes were used to evaluate the stresses experimentally. Students determined the criterion by which the apparatus was tested and designed. They were then required to perform the testing. Prior to applying the strain gage and testing their apparatus, they also submitted a complete testing procedure and theoretical analysis for review. Next, a comparison of the test results to results obtained using analytical techniques and finite element analysis was made. In the process of completing this project, students learned many aspects of experimental design and stress analysis including developing testing criteria, implementation of strain gages for testing designs, correlation of theoretical and experimental results, and how to design an experiment and collect the experimental data so that it is most useful. Introduction The "Program Outcomes and Assessment"1 section of the ABET evaluation criteria for 2001- 2002 strongly encourage both the teaching of design and design of experiments in the curriculum. This work addresses several of the ABET program objectives, specifically a, b, c, e and g. The objectives met include: (a) an ability to apply knowledge of mathematics, science, and engineering . . . (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 . . . Proceedings of the 2002 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition Copyright Ó 2002, American Society for Engineering Education Main Menu