Education for Chemical Engineers 30 (2020) 40–48

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Education for Chemical Engineers

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ece

Fun with fluid: An innovative assignment in fluid mechanics

Sachin Mandavgane
Visvesvaraya National Institute of Technology, South Ambazari Road, Nagpur, Maharashtra, 440010, India

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Fluid mechanics (FM) is a core course of the Chemical (ChE), Mechanical, Civil, and Aerospace Engineering
Received 31 July 2018 programs. The general expectation is that students should be able to demonstrate the fundamentals
Received in revised form learnt in theory and get hands-on experience during the lab course. In this regard, the author of this
13 November 2019
paper organized an assignment plus competition entitled “Fun with Fluid” (FwF). The event had the
Accepted 14 November 2019
following four segments: (1) fun with fluid, (2) frugal lab, (3) design of a thought problem, and (4) a
Available online 18 November 2019
PowerPoint presentation of the FM concepts. The author of this paper had two cabin meetings with each
group (registration/guidance in selecting topic and presentation rehearsal). Through this assignment,
Keywords:
Fluid mechanics
students were able to design and conduct experiments. Additionally, it gave them a chance to assess
Assignment their communication ability, work with multidisciplinary teams, and understand contemporary issues.
Creativity Each exhibit was evaluated in three stages. Before the event, instructor and teaching assistants assessed
YouTube projects while for evaluation during the event three experts from outside the institute were invited.
Social media Evaluation was based on scientific content, novelty, presentation and questions-answer session. Since
Frugal innovation 2015 FwF is an annual activity. Videos of exhibits are available on YouTube.
© 2019 Institution of Chemical Engineers. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction or processes; social skills, that is, the extent to which students
learn how to productively perform engineering-related activities in
The function of the engineering profession is to manipulate groups; and professional skills, that is, the extent to which students
materials, energy, and information for the benefit of humankind. become familiar with the technical skills they will be expected
To do this successfully, engineers must have a knowledge of nature to have when practicing in the profession Feisel and Rosa (2005)
that goes beyond mere theory—knowledge that is traditionally comprehensively discussed the role of laboratory in undergradu-
gained in educational laboratories. Broadly, engineering labora- ate (UG) courses. The authors provided a historical prospective of
tories can be classified into the following types: development, laboratories in UG courses, commented on the present status, and
research, and educational. This paper deals with an innovative even proposed future scope of research. For the first time, Feisel and
assignment in an educational laboratory. Laboratory practice, Rosa laid down the fundamental objectives (13 in total) of engi-
where students design and conduct experiments based on class- neering instructional laboratories, which included the following
room activities, is an essential part of the educational process. keywords:
Various reports have indicated that a majority of engineering stu-
dents learn best when exposed to hands-on exercises and activities • Instrumentation
(Feisel and Rosa, 2005). A common goal of educational laborato- • Models
ries is to relate theory and practice or to bring the “real world” • Experiment
into an otherwise theoretical education. More precisely, the edu- • Data analysis
cational goals for any type of laboratory are as follows: conceptual • Design
understanding, that is, the extent to which laboratory activities help • Learn from failure
students understand and solve problems related to key concepts • Creativity
taught in the classroom; design skills, that is, the extent to which lab- • Psychomotor
oratory activities increase students’ abilities to solve open-ended • Safety
problems through the design and construction of new artifacts • Communication
• Teamwork
• Ethics in the laboratory
E-mail addresses: sam@che.vnit.ac.in, mandavgane@gmail.com • Sensory awareness

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ece.2019.11.001
1749-7728/© 2019 Institution of Chemical Engineers. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
 S. Mandavgane / Education for Chemical Engineers 30 (2020) 40–48
Of these 13 objectives, the first five objectives dealing with
cognition—instrumentation, models, experiment, data analysis,
and design—are expected to be covered in the education process.
Then, two objectives related to the psychomotor domain were spec-
ified: psychomotor (the ability to actually manipulate apparatus)
and sensory awareness. The remaining objectives have a cogni-
tive part and also include a significant component of the affective
domain (i.e., behavior and attitudes: learn from failure, creativity,
safety, communication, teamwork, and ethics in the laboratory).
Exposing students to all three of these domains is necessary to make
them effective engineers.
Fluid mechanics has been a subject of interest for laboratory
illustration of classroom activities. Many innovative educational
experiments are reported to be performed in FM laboratories, of
which few are listed below. Students were given innovative design
problems and in some cases the instructor developed novel set ups,
which are discussed in the following section.
In an attempt to engage students in a more active laboratory
experience and increase the level of motivation for the FM study,
The University of Texas at el Paso introduced a design experi-
ence as one its fluid mechanics laboratory activities (Wicker and
Krishnaswamy, 1998). As part of a 4-week fluid mechanics labora-
tory activity, students were challenged to design and manufacture
the least restrictive flow nozzle for a standard test condition within
several design constraints provided. Kinzli et al. (2015) presented
the “Demo Design Challenge” to students, wherein the students
designed and fabricated 24 exhibits. These 24 models were very
cheap and were used by the faculty while teaching the course. The
demonstrations by students included the mechanics of centrifugal
pump, major and minor head loss, hydrostatic force, and orifice
apparatus. It is worth mentioning here that none of these models
cost more than US $60.
Novel experiments such as demonstration of flow in an all-flow
regime in one experimental unit (Willey et al., 2003) and measure-
ment of drag force on model automobiles in wind tunnel (Janna
and Schmidt, 2014) are reported in literature. The study authors
reported that their experiments were a valuable addition to the
fluid mechanics laboratory, and very effective in generating student
interest. Apart from these creative attempts in FM laboratories,
innovative practices are also reported in the literature.
In this paper, the author reports an innovative assignment plus
competition entitled “Fun with Fluid” (FwF), an open-ended assign-
ment to foster creativity in students. It provides an opportunity for
students to learn FM in a fun-filled manner. The paper also presents
the students’ feedback on this learning module along with the
advantages of achieving various accreditation objectives through
the FwF assignment.
1.1. About the FM course
Fluid Mechanics, a level 2 course, has both theory (classroom
teaching) and lab (hands-on experiments) components. The theory
is taught during the fall semester of second year (i.e., 3rd semester)
while the lab is included in the following semester, that is, 4th
semester or the spring semester of second year.
1.1.1. Theory course
The FM course covers the following topics (McCabe et al., 2005;
de Nevers, 2005): properties of fluid, fluid statics, law of conser-
vation of mass/momentum/energy, flow of incompressible fluid
through pipe, flow past solid, flow through a porous medium, trans-
portation and metering of fluid, and agitation and mixing of fluid.
1.1.2. Lab course
The FM lab course is a Level 2 course (for second-year ChE
students) and covers various experiments based on following
41
topics: properties of fluid, fluid statics, law of conservation of
mass/momentum/energy, flow of incompressible fluid through a
pipe, flow past solid, flow through a porous medium, transporta-
tion and metering of fluid, and agitation and mixing of fluid. The
author of this paper regularly provides conventional assignments
such as quiz, viva voce to his students. An attempt was made to
design an assignment with the following objectives:
• Where students will able to demonstrate the FM fundamentals
learned in the classroom
• Where design thinking of students’ is encouraged
• Where the probability of copying is zero
• Where every student group gets a unique problem and its solution
depends on innovativeness and creativity
• Which will make students to think originally
• Which will help me to meet accreditation’s objectives
• Which students will enjoy doing
Following the assignment, the students were asked to present
an exhibit that falls under one of the following segments: fun with
fluid, frugal lab, PowerPoint presentation, and designing a problem
statement. All students welcomed this idea and prepared exhibits
very enthusiastically. The objective of this exercise was to make
students demonstrate the fundamentals of FM in a creative and
innovative way.
1.1.3. FM lab course evaluation
FM lab course evaluation has the following pattern:
• Experiment (total no of experiments: 10) performance and viva
voce on each experiment (5 marks per experiment): 50 %
• Quiz: 25 %
• Fun with Fluid: 25 %
2. About the FwF assignment plus competition
The author of this paper organized an assignment plus compe-
tition entitled “Fun with Fluid”. The event had the following four
segments: (1) fun with fluid, (2) frugal lab, (3) design of a thought
problem, and (4) a PowerPoint presentation of the FM concepts.
Before the competition, there was an open session where students
were briefed about these segments with examples to make them
understand the expectation.
Out of these four segments, the students’ group had to pick
one based on their interest and competency. “Fun with Fluid”
and “Frugal Lab” involves prototype/model making, “Design of a
Problem Statement” demands FM-related contemporary reading
outside the textbook and reference books, and to make an effective
“PowerPoint Presentation,” creative thinking and effective use of
audio–video aids are required.
2.1. About the fun with fluid segment
In the “Fun with Fluid” segment, participants designed and
demonstrated an FM model/project. In this category, students were
expected to come up with a model based on FM fundamentals,
which is both entertaining and educating. The concepts and top-
ics that they learned, studied, and understood in the FM theory
course should be demonstrated by filming a video. For example,
students learn non-Newtonian fluid in the FM course. This segment
can be well-explained by demonstrating fluid thickening using corn
flour. In this experiment, students take an empty bowl and add 2
packets of corn flour over which a bowl of water is added. The con-
stituents are thoroughly mixed until the paste is formed. The paste
can then be taken in hand and squeezed; it will be noticed that
42 S. Mandavgane / Education for Chemical Engineers 30 (2020) 40–48
the paste suddenly converts into a solid-like substance and as the
force is reduced, it starts converting into a liquid and flows out
of the hand. Thus the fluid thickens with shear. For fun, students
started punching the flour. Because of the applied force (fist hitting
the surface), the mixture gets converted into a solid-like substance
(Source: https://youtu.be/sLtIERN7o8E). The objective behind this
segment is to encourage students to exhibit FM fundamentals that
they had learned in theory course in a playful and fun-filled way
to nurture interest about FM in them. More fun-filled videos are
available at https://youtu.be/HQx5Be9g16U.
Literature records similar efforts done in the past. Absi et al.
(2011) presented an innovative teaching/learning pedagogy, which
included the concept of learning through play and its implications
in fluid mechanics. In their study, the experimental setup included
two plastic jerry cans (a blue nontransparent 35-L can and a white
transparent 20-L can), two plugs of 1 cm diameter, a stopwatch,
a meter, a scale of 100-g precision, and a spirit level. By applying
Bernoulli’s equation, students evaluated the impact of water level
and distance of water/soil as a function of time.
“Learning through play proved a great success in fluid mechan-
ics where course evaluations increased substantially. Fluid
mechanics has been progressively perceived as interesting,
useful, pleasant and easy to assimilate. It is shown that this ped-
agogy which includes educational gaming presents benefits for
students. These experiments seem therefore to be a very effec-
tive tool for improving teaching/learning activities in higher
education.”
Absi et al. (2011) claimed that their methodology is based on the
idea of motivating students with a play-based pedagogy through
atypical experiments to verify and validate some theoretical results
found in course by referring to daily life situations.
2.2. About frugal lab
To develop a frugal lab, students were asked to design and fab-
ricate a prototype to demonstrate the basics of FM using minimal
resources that are easily available and used in day-to-day life. In this
segment, participants demonstrated FM fundamentals that they
understood using very-low-cost resources. The objective was not to
assess the aesthetics of the model, design perfection, or accuracy of
results but to assess how clear students’ understanding of concept
is and how effectively it can be conveyed using the frugal approach.
The participating teams presented creative and innovative models
to explain the principles of fluid statics, Bernoulli’s equation, flow
through a pipe, flow through a porous medium (e.g., packed bed
or fluidized bed). The materials used for designing these models
included garden hosepipe, PVC pipe pieces, drinking straws, and
plastic bottles.
Few educators have demonstrated FM fundamentals using com-
monly used materials. For example, Recktenwald et al. (2009)
described a laboratory exercise, which is a part of the research
project entitled “Engineering of Everyday Things (EET).” The
“Everyday Things” in the title refers to the devices in daily use,
such as blenders, hair dryers, bicycle pumps, toasters, computer
power supplies, as objects of the measurements of fluid mechan-
ics phenomenon. In addition to those everyday technologies, the
EET project also includes exercises involving simple objects such
as cylindrical tanks of water and a duct with an area change. The
project is expected to engage students in fluid mechanics problem-
solving activities as they conduct experiments, while also exposing
them and helping them correct misconceptions of fluid mechanics.
Foley et al. (2015) constructed, tested, and modeled a sim-
ple, inexpensive venturi meter using two plastic funnels. More
specifically, this simple venturi meter, constructed from materi-
als available at a local hardware/auto parts store, was characterized
by determining the venturi coefficient and the permanent pressure
loss. Students used this experiment to execute three Bernoulli bal-
ances within the overall system. Although the frugal venturi meter
was as efficient as a well-designed commercial venturi meter, the
objective was not the accuracy of answer but to induce design
thinking among students.
2.3. About designing a thought problem
Thought problems were framed using articles from magazine
and journals. In this segment, participating students were asked to
search for studies published between 2010 and 2015 using the fol-
lowing keywords: flow meters (orifice, venturi, and weir), pump,
two-phase flow, and packed bed. Students were suggested to search
on scholar.google.co.in, national dailies, science magazines, and
web portals. Some textbooks (Munson et al., 2009) included a “Flu-
ids in the News” section, which had news stories involving current,
sometimes novel, applications of fluid phenomena. Students then
presented a poster on the literature searched and reviewed. At the
end of the poster presentation, the teams framed a thought-based
question based on the topic they reviewed. During this exercise,
students learned about contemporary research and development
on the topics they are learning in their engineering programs. Con-
trary to finding a solution to a given real-life problem, in this
segment, students themselves designed a problem based on the
articles that they searched.
Designing a thought problem is an open-ended exercise based
on real-world problems. Similar attempts were also reported in the
literature. For example, Bondehagen (2011) developed two projects
based on real-world issues. The topics were so chosen to ensure
that the fluid mechanics covered in course (theory) would be eas-
ily applicable to the assignment (practice). The first assignment
involved the application of FM fundamentals to the “Deepwater
Horizon Oil Spill,” which occurred in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010.
Students were asked to apply fluid mechanics fundamentals, such
as effect of hydrostatic forces on submerged plane/curved surfaces,
surface tension, and the Bernoulli/energy equation, to formulate a
suitable solution. The second assignment was an open-ended ques-
tion to generate electrical energy using Bay of Fundy and Rance
River as resources. Students were asked to apply fluid mechanics
principles to capture the tidal and wave energy (potential energy)
and use turbo machinery (kinetic energy) to generate electrical
energy.
According to Panta et al. (2015) the traditional style of teaching
does not typically provide opportunities for students to implement
classroom learning to solve an open-ended case study or real-world
problems.
Students were encouraged to come up with their topic of inter-
est with relevance to real-word issues within the scope of fluid
mechanics. The project topics identified were as follows:
1 Analysis and redesign of flow pipelines for natural gas supply
2 Analysis of hydrostatic forces on a rectangular gate submerged
in the WVU Tech swimming pool
3 Fluid flow analysis on water dams
4 Pump selection for water supply in a multistory building
5 Pump selection for a basement sump pump system
6 Munro (2002) and Marchese (2001) have described open-ended
Fluid Mechanics laboratory projects that incorporate a multidis-
ciplinary approach to solving design problems.
2.4. About PowerPoint presentation
The PowerPoint presentation (PPT) session was aimed at the
non-ChE and non-FM learning audience. It is a common notion
that if one has to explain a topic to a person who has no basic
 S. Mandavgane / Education for Chemical Engineers 30 (2020) 40–48
knowledge in the subject, then he/she has to make his/her topic
simple, interesting, and lucid. If the person has fully absorbed and
digested the topic, only then can he/she make the other person
understand it. This common psychological fact was used in this seg-
ment and required participants to prepare PPT slides for non-ChE
and non-FM learning students. Thus, when the PPT is to be made, it
should start with the very basic (without assuming that the listener
knows anything) and apparently obvious concepts (obvious for FM
learners).
This exercise helped students to understand a wide spectrum
of ChE and gave them a chance to assess their communication
ability. Some of the titles were “ChE in kitchen,” “ChE for school
students,”“ChE in TV commercials,” and “ChE in human body.”
2.5. Composition of the participating team
The suggested composition of a team was 3 (second-year ChE
students) + 1 (anybody from ChE higher semester) + 1 (optional:
from outside the ChE department) + 1 (optional: someone from out-
side the institute).
The preference was to have participants from different
semesters, different branches, and different institute (may be
from different countries). Although virtual participation (Inter-
net/videoconferencing) was encouraged, no one outside the
institute participated. The fluid mechanics course is taught to
Mechanical and Civil Engineering UG students as well. The third-
and fourth-year ChE students have learned this course (both theory
and practical) in their second year. The higher-semester students
and non-ChE students were not registered for the course; how-
ever, because the event was an assignment plus competition, they
participated in the event. Thus, the event was an assignment plus
competition for second-year ChE students (as they enrolled for
the course) and only a competition for others. The students’ group
picked any one segment out of the four listed.
3. Students’ reports and exhibits
In the assignment instructions, the author directed the students
to present a clear, succinct analysis of their exhibit and chosen
applications of Fluid Mechanics principles. In fact, throughout the
laboratory course, written and communication skills were eval-
uated and feedback was provided as necessary. The continuous
improvement of technical writing skills is emphasized in the cur-
riculum, and therefore, the written reports provided an evaluation
of the progress of this writing development (technical report format
guidelines and a sample report were provided to the participating
teams). In this paper, one or two representative projects/exhibits of
each vertical are presented. Each group submitted the report with
the following format:
• Title
• Name of team members
• Abstract
• Fluid mechanics principle used
• Picture/diagram
• Learning experience
• Conclusion
The materials given below each vertical are excerpt from the
reports submitted by the participating teams. Table 1 presented at
the end of Section 5.2 gives the list of all the topics presented under
each vertical.
43
3.1. Sample exhibit from fun with fluid segment
One of the exhibits under this segment was Demonstration of
water bottle rocket based on the momentum theorem principle of
FM.
The exhibit contains a bottle partly filled with water and sealed.
The bottle was then pressurized up to 125 psi with compressed air
using an air compressor. The seal on the nozzle of the bottle was
then released, which caused rapid expulsion of water at high speeds
until the propellant has been used up and the air pressure inside
the rocket drops to atmospheric pressure. A net force is created on
the rocket in accordance with momentum theorem. The expulsion
of the water thus caused the rocket to leap a considerable distance
into the air.
3.2. Sample exhibits from frugal lab
3.2.1. Designing of an experiment to validate Torcilli’s equation
An experimental setup was designed using a water bottle, a nee-
dle, water, measuring scale, and a measuring cylinder to validate
Torcilli’s equation. A transparent drinking water bottle was taken
and a hole was made at the middle of the bottle using a nail. Water
was filled up to the neck keeping the hole closed. The height of the
fluid above the hole was noted. The cap on the hole was removed
and the fluid was allowed to ooze out. The flow rate was measured
using a measuring cylinder. The fluid collected in the measuring
cylinder for a given time (t) was measured and volumetric flow
rate (Q) was computed. Using the diameter of the hole, volumetric
flow rate velocity (V) was calculated. Velocity measured experi-
mentally and calculated using Torricelli’s equation (Vtheoretical =

2gh) were compared. Discharged coefficient was measured using
the following ratio: Vobserved /Vtheoretical . Students learned to design
an experiment to demonstrate a law of science using simple and
low-cost materials.
3.2.2. Fabrication of an ultralow cost pitot tube
An ultralow cost pitot tube was fabricated using a PVC pipe (0.5
in diameter and 12 ft long), a 90◦ elbow, a plug, and drinking straws
A 12-ft long PVC pipe was cut into two parts of 8 and 4 in., respec-
tively. One end of the 4-in. pipe was joined by a 90◦ elbow to the 8-in
pipe, and its other end was closed by a plug. A hole was made on the
44 S. Mandavgane / Education for Chemical Engineers 30 (2020) 40–48
plug and a drinking straw was inserted until it touches the elbow.
This simple assembly helped us to measure velocity of fluid in open
channel using the formula V = (2 × g × h)0.5 , where V is velocity and
h is the height of fluid raised in the straw. Students expressed that
it was a fun to fabricate a pitot tube in less than a prize of a Coke.
3.3. Sample exhibit designing a thought problem
3.3.1. Pitot tube and flight accidents
A group of students searched the literature on use of pitot tube
and its application in real life, especially in aeroplanes (airplanes)
and found a few case studies on airplane accidents caused by
improper measurement of velocity by the pitot tube (Anon, 2019).
Pitot tubes measurements are critical to ensure proper air speed;
flying too slowly can cause the plane to stall and flying too fast
can cause a structural break up. If an aircraft encounters icing
conditions at a certain altitude—where moisture and very cold
temperatures can combine—and icing forms on the pitot tubes,
blockage or partial blockage of one or more of the tubes is a possi-
bility. This in turn leads to incorrect readings of the air speed and
misinforming the pilots.
Icing of pitot tube was the probable cause of crash of Air France
Flight 447, an Airbus A-330 aircraft, on June 1, 2009, during its flight
from Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, to Paris, France as reported by the French
accident investigation agency—equivalent to the US NTSB.
Based on this accident, a thought problem entitled “design an
air speed measuring instrument that is less vulnerable to icing”
was designed.
In this exercise, students learnt to search literature and how
improper measurement can affect human life.
3.4. Sample exhibit from PowerPoint presentation
3.4.1. Chemical engineering for school students
In most cases, school students almost never understand which
branch is most suitable for them. Their choice is mostly based on
what their friends chose, their rank, and the general mentality.
Because most do not have a clear picture about chemical engi-
neering, a group of students felt it is necessary to clear these
misconceptions and present a clear idea about chemical engineer-
ing to school students by PPT.
A presentation to answer the basic questions that might arise
in school children regarding chemical engineering was prepared.
The presentation began with answering the question “Why should
one choose to become a chemical engineer.” Then it explained
why chemical engineering matters, by showing how chemical
engineering provides us with a variety of products fulfilling our
requirements in every stage of our life. The presentation included
a short video, comprising three short commercials and explained
how the field is still growing and how there are new innovations
every day. The slides showed some famous personalities who have
a degree in chemical engineering and huge chemical engineering
firms.
While making the PPT for school children, students gain a lot
of knowledge about ChE for themselves and learnt about the vari-
ous fields a chemical engineer works in, the opportunities available
after his/her graduation.
3.4.2. Chemical engineering and human body
One PPT was titled “Chemical Engineering and Human Body”
was presented. The PPT correlated different body organs with unit
operations and unit processes. For example, heart was compared
with a pump, lungs with membranes, on the basis of osmosis, kid-
ney with a filter, skin with heat exchangers (heat and mass-transfer
operations), arteries and veins with pipelines, stomach with a batch
reactor, and large intestines with a plug flow reactor.
Students learnt about the different chemical operations and
their relation with functioning of different body organs, which was
a fun-filled task. It was concluded that human body functioning is
similar to that of a chemical industry. The PPT won the third prize
in the competition.
4. Role of the instructor and TA in the assignment
The instructor guided the students to select the topics. He also
had two cabin meetings with each group (registration/guidance in
selecting the topic and presentation rehearsal). In the first meet-
ing, each group came up with chosen topics for the fun with fluid
assignment, which were discussed in detail and one suitable topic
was eventually finalized. In the second meeting, the teams iden-
tified relevant studies and prepared a schematic representation of
the exhibit that they planned to make. At this point, the author
made midterm corrections and gave instructions as applicable. A
pre-event assessment was done based on the second cabin meet-
ing. The projects that lacked either scientific components or proper
presentation were requested to be redone, with help from a TA,
who helped to improve the quality significantly. The author was
involved right from ideation to preparation of project to final pre-
sentation at the event.
5. Assessment
There was a three-stage assessment as follows:
• Pre-event assessment
• Assessment during the event
• Post event assessment
5.1. Pre-event assessment
Students were briefed about the event and the details of all four
verticals. Each group discussed the theme and broad title of the
project with the instructor during the first cabin meeting. After
the second cabin meeting, where the topic was further crystallized,
the participants submitted a brief write up (maximum 300 words)
that explained their projects. The write up was assessed by the
instructor and teaching assistants. The participants who planned
to make models (“frugal lab” and “fun with fluid” segments) dis-
cussed and showed their semi prepared models. Participants of the
“design of thought problem” and “PowerPoint presentation” seg-
ments showed their collected and reviewed literature. Based on
the pre-event assessment, each project was evaluated on the scale
of 10 according to the following parameters:
• Scientific content
• Creativity
• Novelty
Projects scoring less than 6 were given handholding by the
author of this paper to improve their quality. Table 1 presents
 S. Mandavgane / Education for Chemical Engineers 30 (2020) 40–48 45

Table 1
Assessment results of projects presented in the Fun with Fluid event (Edition in 2015).

Assessment during event

S. No. Title Category Pre-event Assessment
Q&A Scientific Content Creativity Presentation

1 Laminar Flow Fountain Fun with Fluid 8 10 18 15 14

2 Hydraulic Lift Fun with Fluid 6 6 15 23 15
3 Ferro Fluid Fun with Fluid 6 8 14 20 14
4 Non-Newtonian Fluids Fun with Fluid 9 18 17 25 20
5 Bending of Laser Light Using Water Fun with Fluid 8 7 17 25 16
6 Pressure Difference Caused ByVacuum Fun with Fluid 6 6 14 23 14
7 Giant Dry Ice Bubble Experiment Fun with Fluid 4 10 13 15 13
8 Self-Flowing Fountain and Viscous Fluids Fun with Fluid 6 8 16 23 16
9 Hydraulic Crane Fun with Fluid 7 20 14 20 18
10 Fluid Mechanics in Kitchen PPT 5 8 15 13 12
11 Chemical Engineering for School Students PPT 8 12 15 24 17
12 Chemical Engineering in Automobiles PPT 6 8 16 20 15
13 Chemical Engineering in Commercials PPT 7 6 15 18 13
14 Chemical Engineering in Human Body PPT 8 14 16 20 17
15 Pitot Tube and AeroplaneAccidents Thought Problem 5 8 14 18 13
16 CFD Simulation of Orifice Thought Problem 4 10 15 15 13
17 Selection of Flow Meters Thought Problem 7 11 16 15 13
18 Torricelli’s Law Frugal Lab 7 8 14 25 16
19 Water Bottle Rocket Frugal Lab 7 15 15 20 17
20 Hydroarm Frugal Lab 5 9 15 18 14
21 Archimedes Principle Frugal Lab 6 11 16 15 14
22 Antigravity Water Experiment Frugal Lab 6 19 14 25 19
23 Ferro Fluid Frugal Lab 7 15 17 20 17
24 Tube Using a Basic Pipe and Few Straws
Pitot Frugal Lab 8 16 15 25 21
A= ni whereni is the mark received 263 366 476 368
by the individual group in a particular
skill/head
% score = (A/B)×100 44 61 79 61
B = 24 × 25 [number of fields (24) × % % % %
max marks per field (25)]

all the titles of the projects along with their category and assess- Creativity
ment scores. From the table, is clear that 5 of the 24entries were
below average for which the TAs provided additional guidance. The
i Novel applications (real-time scenarios/industries, case studies)
pre-event assessment is meant for handholding of the group and
of the existing know-how within the framework of laws of FM
identifying originality of the exhibit. Moreover, based on the pre-
(out-of-the-box thinking) (50 %)
event assessment, each group was given input to improve wherever
ii Use of tools and techniques (software/schematic dia-
necessary. Individual interaction during the pre-event assessment
grams/animations/prototype) (50 %)
helped identify and curb blind copying.

Q&A
5.2. Assessment during the event

Each group was given 10 min to present the project, follow-
ing which the invited evaluators asked questions relevant to their
topic/presentation. Three evaluators were invited from outside the
institute: one was the Chairman of National Children Innovation
Programme, second was a young entrepreneur, and the third was
an experienced professor working in developing frugal chemical
engineering experimental set up. Experts’ evaluation was based on
presentation (25 %), scientific content (25 %), creativity (25 %), and
question–answer session (25 %). Following evaluation criteria were
used in each category for assessment.
Presentation
i Organization and flow of the talk/exhibit and clarity in commu-
nication (40)
ii Neatness of the exhibit (30 %)
iii Time utilization (30 %)
Scientific content
i Illustration of underlying fundamental principle of FM in the
exhibit (50 %)
ii Use of supportive references (50 %)
i Basic applications and implementations of the FM concepts (50
%)
ii Knowledge of relevant assumptions, mathematical calculations,
equations and models (30 %)
iii Knowledge of abbreviations, symbols and units (20 %)
The assessment made by external experts is given in Table 1.
To evaluate and focus on students’ efforts, an evaluation rubric
is presented in Table 1. The presented rubric is for 2015 edition
and similar rubric was followed for subsequent editions. From the
rubric, it can be observed that the creativity component in all the
exhibits was high (79 %). Thus, the core objectives of FwF, that is, to
make students demonstrate the fundamentals of FM in a creative
and innovative way are achieved. The scientific content and presen-
tation skills of the students were fair (61 %). From the results it is
clear that students failed to defend their project and could not pro-
vide satisfactory answer to the questions asked by the evaluators
(44 %). The evaluators opined that participants showed hesitation
while answering their questions and in some cases students pro-
vided wrong answers. The student remarked that they felt a bit
nervous in front of “outside” evaluators, and thus could not pro-
vide satisfactory answers. Based on the students’ and evaluators’
feedback, following steps were taken in the subsequent editions:
46 S. Mandavgane / Education for Chemical Engineers 30 (2020) 40–48

Table 2
Assessment results of projects presented in the Fun with Fluid event (Edition in 2019).

Assessment during event

Sr. No. Title Category Pre-event Assessment
Q&A Scientific Content Creativity Presentation

1 Hero’s fountain Fun with Fluid 6 18 16 25 21

2 Traffic Control using Fluid Mechanic Principles Fun with Fluid 6 18 21 25 19
3 Fluid Mechanics in Sports Fun with Fluid 7 19 18 20 21
4 Drip Irrigation Technique Fun with Fluid 4 17 17 19 18
5 Hurricane Katrina PPT 8 16 17 24 18
6 Study of aerodynamics and its application PPT 6 18 16 18 14
7 Hemodynamics PPT 7 16 21 18 19
8 Water Irrigation PPT 8 17 22 20 20
9 Water Distribution System PPT 8 18 14 24 17
10 Pipe for Pressure Equalisation Tank Thought Problem 6 18 19 23 16
11 Non-newtonian Fluids Thought Problem 5 18 17 18 21
12 Flixborough Disaster Thought Problem 6 19 20 20 18
13 Fun With ThixotropicFluids Thought Problem 5 16 18 18 21
14 Lactometer Thought Problem 4 19 19 17 20
15 Cranberry Earthquake Thought Problem 7 21 17 18 19
16 Pump Disaster Thought Problem 7 17 16 25 20
17 Pipe Leakage Frugal Lab 7 20 18 20 18
18 Fluidized Bed Frugal Lab 7 16 17 20 19
19 Surface Phenomenon of Fluids Frugal Lab 5 12 18 22 19
20 Automatic Drip Chamber Frugal Lab 6 20 20 18 20
21 Packed Bed Column Frugal Lab 8 20 18 18 17
22 Submarine Frugal Lab 9 18 17 25 20
23 
Rotameter Frugal Lab 8 16 20 25 21
A= ni whereni is the mark received 335 435 503 453
by the individual group in a particular
skill/head
% score = (A/B) × 100 71 73 84 76
B = 24 × 25 [number of fields % % % %
(24) × max marks per field (25)]

1) The evaluators’ team has few department faculties (with whom
students are well versed) along with the ‘outside’ evaluator.
2) Students were provided a general template of questions to be
prepared which included the following questions:
a What is the governing FM principle behind the exhibit?
b Explain the mathematical equation involved.
c What are assumptions in the governing principle?
d Search day-to-day life application of the governing principle.
Table 2 presents the results of 2019 edition. A comparison
between results in Table 1 (2015 edition) and Table 2 (2019 edi-
tion) shows that the results have improved over the two periods.
The rubric for the 2019 edition shows that students could defend
their exhibit well and answer the questions better (71 %) than the
2015 edition (44 %). Comparatively, students’ performance under
the components ‘Scientific content’ and ‘Creativity’ improved from
61 % in each in 2015 to 73 % and 76 % in 2019, respectively.
The FwF assignment has 25 % weightage in the total FM lab
course (Total marks 100) evaluation, as mentioned in Section 1.1.3.
The arithmetic mean of the marks obtained in the four categories
(Q&A, scientific content, creativity, and presentation) is taken as
the marks out of 25 for all members of the respective group.
The winning project is selected based on the marks obtained.
The pre-event assessment score is not taken into account. However,
the pre-event marks are shared with the final evaluators.
those from other departments and our seniors as well as under-
stand common daily phenomenon that involve fluid mechanics.
• The event also helped us to learn working in teams, to respect
each other’s ideas, and learn some basic applications of fluid
mechanics.
• We learnt about the different chemical industries equipment
and its functioning. Learning about correlation of different body
organs with chemical industries equipment was great fun and we
learnt more about our body functioning, which is same as that of
chemical industries. From this we got to know that chemical engi-
neering is applicable everywhere. We got the third prize in the
competition.
• We learned how to apply the basic concepts learned in classroom
in the real life.
• This event helped us in developing our understanding of fluid
mechanics. It helped us clear the basic knowledge related to Drags
coefficient which was a part of our exhibit. This event increased
our confidence level in presenting our ideas more clearly.
Feedback from the participants of the event was sought. Stu-
dents were asked to provide their opinion about the assignment
and the impact it had on them. The following questions were asked
to the students and their response is presented in Fig. 1.

5.3. Post event evaluation • Did the FwF assignment help you learn and demonstrate the fun-
damentals of the subject?
The post event evaluation included feedback from the students • Did FwF help you to think creatively about the course application
and their learning experiences. in real life?
• Did the FwF assignment help you to learn nuances of teamwork?
5.4. Students’ feedback • Did the FwF assignment help you to improve your communica-
tion skill?
• Fun with fluids indeed turned out to be a fun event. It was a good • Have you taken assistance of anybody (friend/faculty) other than
experience to interact with our fellow batch mates, including the chemical engineering staff/seniors during FwF?
 S. Mandavgane / Education for Chemical Engineers 30 (2020) 40–48
Fig. 1. Students’ feedback on the FwF assignment.
Overall, the students’ response was positive. The students found
the lab course interesting, as they were able to easily correlate what
they learnt in the classroom with the world around them. About 78
% of students remarked that the assignment helped them learn and
demonstrate the fundamentals of FM. About 84 % of the students
felt that this assignment made them think creatively and apply the
various principles of FM in an innovative way.
Because the assignment is a team task, 80 % of the students felt
that they learnt the nuances in team collaboration with peers as
well as to communicate effectively using the audio-visual medium.
Because one of the members of the team had to be from outside
the Chemical Engineering Department, all students (100 %) sought
help from departments other than their own, indicating initiation of
interdisciplinary efforts. These students mentioned that they had
several discussions with students of Mechanical Engineering and
Civil Engineering departments because they also study FM in their
undergraduate course. As mentioned in Section 2.5, participation by
a student outside the Chemical Engineering Department and even
outside the institute was also suggested, though it was optional.
The intention behind asking questions was to know whether Chem-
ical Engineering students have gone out of the ‘comfort zone’ and
fetched a group member(s) outside the department. Here ‘external
help’ is intended as a group member outside the Chemical Engi-
neering department.
6. The impact on learning
The raison d’être of this innovative assignment was to cultivate
the practice of self-learning among students. The students were
required to think out of the box, access new material, demonstrate
principles on their own, and apply their knowledge to the chosen
project. By their free participation in this assignment plus compe-
tition, the students discovered the value of effort and no longer
hesitated to ask questions or seek solutions to encountered prob-
lems. Thus, learning is no longer a mere assimilation of information
or replication of abstract knowledge but is an aid to trigger curiosity
and passion. In FwF, like open-ended innovative assignments, the
teacher learns as much as students, because while teaching stu-
dents to remain curious, he/she reinforces his/her skills to seek
solutions to unforeseen problems.
Fig. 2 compares the grades students earned in the FM lab course
in 2012 and 2019. There is a clear-cut improvement in students’
learning experience. In 2012, 68 % of students earned top grades
(AA and AB), whereas this number increased to 89 % in 2019.
7. About the final event
The first edition of the event was conducted on April 9, 2015,
while the fourth in 2018 it was conducted on 17th April. Videos of
each edition and exhibits are available on YouTube; in each edi-
47
Fig. 2. Comparison of grades earned by students in the FM lab course in 2012 and
2019.
tion 80+ students participated and 20+ exhibits were presented.
The venue of the event was ChE department’s FM laboratory. The
judges announced the top three exhibits and they were awarded
prizes. The judges gave marks out of 100 to each exhibit, which
were converted by multiplying them by ¼. These were then given as
assignment marks to the participants (second-year students) who
enrolled for the course. Thus, the 1-day event served as both an
assignment and a competition.
8. Use of YouTube
FwF had its fifth edition in March 2019 while the fourth
edition in April 2018. The exhibits of FwF since 2015 are
uploaded on a YouTube Channel ‘Students Innovate’ (https://
www.youtube.com/channel/UCgnjiM5nt9Z8NhungPA5y w/
about), a channel which is created and managed by UG stu-
dents. Playlists (Fun with Fluid) are created and videos of exhibits
are uploaded. Info of 2015 edition (https://www.youtube.com/
playlist?list=PLLJXt0mukvz7fZMadTsANAii4r pTqjcX), 2016 edi-
tion (https://youtu.be/0ykpdtw3PNQ), and 2017 edition (https://
youtu.be/DHDr2dR4XcM) and 2018 edition (https://www.youtube.
com/playlist?list=PLLJXt0mukvz5OwKNb DvWzz8jfLXqPqMz) are
uploaded on YouTube. Literature reports active use of YouTube
videos in teaching (Hrenya, 2011; Liberatore, 2010).
Hrenya (2011) used YouTube video to introduce an apparatus
in gravity-driven tube flow, with small groups of students partak-
ing in a contest to predict the experimental flow rates using the
mechanical energy balance. Prizes were given to group with best
prediction of experimental outcomes. Liberatore (Ford, 2003) used
YouTube videos for teaching thermodynamics and CPC. In 1st pilot
study students were supposed to form a group of five and find the
videos related to topics which are being taught in class and present
them in front of class. In 2nd pilot students were encouraged to
write a report on video about how it is related to topic and dis-
cuss some Q and A regarding it. Author concluded that YouTube
Fridays only take a small fraction of class time and are an effec-
tive way to engage students expand the content of the course in
a dynamic way. Ford (Liberatore, 2010) celebrated ‘Water Day’
wherein Students demonstrated principles of fluid mechanics using
household stuff like hose, plastic cans etc. Students were given
observation sheets to evaluate and note down their observations.
Author (Mandavgane, 2016) used Facebook for teaching FM course.
Apart from these creative attempts in FM laboratories, innovative
practices are also reported in the literature.
9. Challenges in FwF
FwF is an unconventional assignment compared with quiz, writ-
ten test, and viva voce. The author has to educate the participating
48 S. Mandavgane / Education for Chemical Engineers 30 (2020) 40–48
students as well as the TAs about the assignment and even has to
convince them. Apart from scheduled cabin meetings, frequent cor-
ridor talks are required with the students during the initial phase
of topic selection. Six to eight TAs are engaged to handhold 20–24
teams which generally participate. An orientation and training of
TAs is conducted separately. The evaluators of the final event are to
be briefed about the concept of FwF and to be informed about the
rubric of evaluation.
10. Conclusion
The classroom lectures nurture students to build a strong foun-
dation on theories and principles of applied science which they
apply through hands-on laboratory exercises and in-class and
homework assignments. The FwF assignment plus competition had
four verticals, namely, (1) fun with fluid, (2) frugal lab, (3) design
of a problem statement, and (4) PowerPoint presentation wherein
five-member teams consisting of three second-year ChE students,
one senior ChE student (third or fourth year), and a fifth mem-
ber from outside the ChE department. The main objective of the
FwF segment was to make students think out-of-the-box. Students
were encouraged to look at the FM fundamentals, laws, and equa-
tions from a new angle to make an “interesting” and “entertaining”
exhibit. Students’ initial perception of FM course as “difficult” was
changed to “playful” after the event!
Thus, the FwF assignment gave the students an opportunity to
choose a FM project based on their acumen and attitude, such
as innovative thinking, design thinking, lifelong learning, con-
temporary learning, and presentation skill. From the three-stage
assessment, it was concluded that students enjoyed learning FM
due to the FwF assignment.
Declaration of Competing Interest
Author have no financial or other conflicts of interest to declare.
References
Absi, Rafik, Nalpas, Caroline, Dufour, Florence, Huet, Denis, Bennacer, Rachid,
Absi, Tahar, 2011. Teaching fluid mechanics for undergraduate students in
applied industrial biology: from theory to atypical experiments. Int. J. Eng.
Educ. 27 (3), 550–558 (Special Issue on Learning Through Play In Engineering
Education).
http://www.forbes.com/sites/johngoglia/2014/12/28/asiaair-flight-8501-what-
are-pitot-tubes-and-how-could-they-affect-flight/.
Bondehagen, Diane L., 2011. Inspiring students to learn fluid mechanics through
engagement with real world problems. Proceedings of the 2011 American Soci-
ety for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition.
de Nevers, Noel, 2005. Fluid Mechanics for Chemical Engineers, third edition.
McGraw Hill Chemical Engineering Series.
Feisel, L.D., Rosa, A.J., 2005. The role of the laboratory in undergraduate engineering
education. J. Eng. Educ. 94 (1), 121–130.
Foley, Jordan N., Thompson, John W., Williams, Meaghan M., Roy Penney, W.,
Clausen, Edgar C., 2015. A simple, inexpensive venturi experiment—applying
the Bernoulli balance to determine flow and permanent pressure loss. Proceed-
ings of the 2015 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference
& Exposition.
Ford, Laura P., 2003. WATER DAY an experiential lecture for fluid mechanics. Chem.
Eng. Educ. 170–173 (Summer).
Hrenya, Christine M., 2011. Active learning in fluid mechanics: YouTube tube flow
and puzzling fluids questions. Chem. Eng. Educ. 45 (Spring (2)), 114–119.
Janna, William S., Schmidt, David, 2014. Fluid mechanics laboratory experiment:
measurement of drag on model vehicles. Proceedings of the 2014 American
Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition.
Kinzli, Kristoph-Dietrich, Kunberger, Tanya, O’Neill, Robert, 2015. A low cost
approach for rapidly creating demonstration models for hands-on learning.
Proceedings of the 2015 American Society for Engineering Education Annual
Conference & Exposition.
Liberatore, Matthew W., 2010. YouTube fridays: engaging the
net generation in 5 minutes a week. Chem. Eng. Educ.
44 (Summer (3)).
Mandavgane, S., 2016. Use of Facebook in teaching: a case study of fluid mechanics
course. Chem. Eng. Educ. 50 (4), 238–244.
Marchese, A.J., 2001. The sophomore engineering clinic: an introduction to the
design process through a series of open ended projects. Proceedings of the 2001
American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition.
McCabe, Warren L., Smith, Julian C., Harriott, Peter, 2005. Unit Operations of Chem-
ical Engineering, seventh edition. McGraw Hill International Edition.
Munro, James M., 2002. A design experiment for the fluid mechanics laboratory.
Proceedings of the 2002 American Society for Engineering Education Annual
Conference & Exposition.
Munson, Young, Okiishi’s, 2009. Fundamentals of Fluid Mechanics, 6th edition. Wiley
Publication.
Panta, Yogendra, Thornton, Levi, Webb, Cody, Targosky, Roger, Rankou, Brendon,
Richards, Daniel, 2015. Fostering students’ capability of problem solving through
semester projects in fluid mechanics. Proceedings of the 2015 American Society
for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition.
Recktenwald, Gerald W., Edwards, Robert C., Howe, Douglas, Faulkner, Jenna, 2009. A
simple experiment to expose misconceptions about the Bernoulli equation. Pro-
ceedings of IMECE 2009, ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress
and Exposition.
Wicker, Ryan B., Krishnaswamy, Harish K., 1998. A fluid mechanics laboratory nozzle
design. Proceedings of the 1998 American Society for Engineering Education
Annual Conference & Exposition.
Willey, Ronald J., Lopez, Guido, Turan, Deniz, Buonopane, Ralph A., Bina, Alfred J.,
2003. A novel fluid flow demonstration/unit operations experiment. Proceed-
ings of the 2003 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference
& Exposition Copyright.