how does Hobbes argue for self-interest and why do you think it’s a good argument?
April 25, 2022
The essence of human resource management (HRM)
April 25, 2022

[ad_1]

Ballistic Transport In Carbon Nanotube Metal-Oxide-Semiconductor Field-Effect Transistors (Cnt-Mosfets)
1 AUM Academic Projects Academic Year: 2018-2019
Course Project Guidelines
EE 453 Fundamentals of Nanoelectronics
Part A: Applications of Nanoparticles in Petroleum Industry Part B: Electron Transport in Nanostructures
Dr. Abdullah Karar, Dr. Bilel Neji, Dr. Wael Farag
30%
Semester: Spring 2019
I. INTRODUCTION
II. LEARNING OUTCOMES
III. PROJECT SUMMARY (SCENARIO)
IV. DELIVERABLES & PROJECT MANAGEMENT
V. PLAGIARISM
VI. MARKING SCHEME
2 AUM Academic Projects Academic Year: 2018-2019
I. INTRODUCTION
Part A: Applications of Nanoparticles in Petroleum Industry [10%] Students will form a group of 2-3 individuals. Each group is assigned one of the following three project titles by the instructor: Title 1: Nanoparticles in Petroleum with Focus on Enhanced Oil Recovery – Exploration
Title 2: Nanoparticles in Petroleum with Focus on Enhanced Oil Recovery – Drilling
Title 3: Nanoparticles in Petroleum with Focus on Enhanced Oil Recovery – Refinery
Part B: Electron Transport in Nanostructures [20%] Each group of students will be assigned one of the following project titles: Title 1: Electron transport in single-walled carbon nanotube
https://nanohub.org/tools/cntbte?controller= Title 2: The spin transport in semiconductors

https://nanohub.org/tools/spinprecession

Title 3: Ballistic transport in carbon nanotube metal-oxide-semiconductor field-effect transistors (CNT-MOSFETs)

https://nanohub.org/tools/moscntr

II. LEARNING OUTCOMES
All projects cover most learning outcomes described in the course syllabus. Refer to the syllabus for more details. Learning outcomes include:

Perform detailed literature survey of a novel, innovative applications of nanotechnology in the oil and gas industry.
Perform analysis and design of nanoelectronic devices. 3. Perform semi-classical analysis of charge and electro flow.

https://nanohub.org/tools/cntbte?controller3 AUM Academic Projects Academic Year: 2018-2019
III. PROJECT SUMMARY
Part A: Applications of Nanoparticles in Petroleum Industry [10%]
Project Deliverable 1 Requirements [10%]:
Students should give a presentation as a group to highlight all the mentioned tasks below. The
presentation should be 12 minutes and the presentation .ppt should be uploaded to Moodle one day
before the scheduled presentation. Using the following reference journal paper:
[1] M. Nur Agista et. al, “A State-of-the-Art Review of Nanoparticles Application in Petroleum with a Focus
on Enhanced Oil Recovery”, Appl. Sci. 2018, 8(6), 871;
Title 1: Nanoparticles Application in Petroleum with Focus on Enhanced Oil Recovery – Exploration
 Define and investigate the concept of “nanoparticles”. Present the importance of nanoparticles in
the field of nanotechnology.
 Demonstrate how nanoparticles can be a promising method for enhanced oil recovery,
particularly in the “exploration” phase. Support your answer with a single application among the
ones referred in the reference [1] above.
Title 2: Nanoparticles Application in Petroleum with Focus on Enhanced Oil Recovery – Drilling
 Define and investigate the concept of “nanoparticles”. Present the importance of nanoparticles in
the field of nanotechnology.
 Demonstrate how nanoparticles can be a promising method for enhanced oil recovery,
particularly in the “drilling” phase. Support your answer with a single application among the ones
referred in the reference [1] above.
Title 3: Nanoparticles Application in Petroleum with Focus on Enhanced Oil Recovery – Refinery
 Define and investigate the concept of “nanoparticles”. Present the importance of nanoparticles in
the field of nanotechnology.
 Demonstrate how nanoparticles can be a promising method for enhanced oil recovery,
particularly in the “refinery” phase. Support your answer with a single application among the ones
referred in the reference [1] above.
4 AUM Academic Projects Academic Year: 2018-2019
Part B: Electron Transport in Nanostructures [20%] In this part of the course project, each group will utilize the available simulation and modelling tools on the nanoHUB website to investigate electron transport in nanostructures. The simulation tool accepts design, model and environmental parameters, and then simulate the nano device accordingly. The simulation accounts for nano-scale devices.
Project Deliverable 2 Requirements [08%]:
Students will give a 10 min in-class demonstration of their investigation of the electron transport using
the modelling tools available at nanoHUB. Each member of the group is expected to participate. During
the demonstration, each group must answer the following questions:
Title 1: Electron transport in single-walled carbon nanotube

https://nanohub.org/tools/cntbte?controller=

 What kind of electron transports are available?
 What are single-walled carbon nanotubes?
 What are the electrical characteristics of carbon nanotube?
 Read the online materials and run the simulation.
 You need to specify simulation criteria.
Title 2: The spin transport in semiconductors

https://nanohub.org/tools/spinprecession

 What is spin transport?
 How does spin transport behave in semiconductors?
 How does spin transport affect the conductivity in the semiconductors?
 Read the online materials and run the simulation.
 You need to specify simulation criteria.
Title 3: Ballistic transport in carbon nanotube metal-oxide-semiconductor field-effect transistors (CNT-
MOSFETs)

https://nanohub.org/tools/moscntr

 What is ballistic transport?
 What are carbon nanotubes?
 What are Metal-Oxide-Semiconductors Field Effect Transistors?
 Read the online materials and run the simulation.
 You need to specify simulation criteria.
https://nanohub.org/tools/cntbte?controller5 AUM Academic Projects Academic Year: 2018-2019
Project Deliverable 3 Requirements [12%]:
A formal technical report for the project [for all titles 1, 2 and 3].
 Students should submit a formal technical report in both softcopy (upload to Moodle) and
hardcopy (submit in person).
 The final technical report should contain all the findings in Project Deliverable 2.
 This report should also include the print screen of the simulations windows, it results, and all other
necessary information about the project.
 Students should clearly show the project methodology, simulation results, and discussion.
 APA style referencing format.
IV. DELIVERABLES & PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Refer to the EE453 Spring 2019 Project Detail Grading scheme document for deliverable 3.
V. PLAGIARISM
 Upon suspicion and doubt of the authenticity of the work submitted, the Instructor has the right to ask the student to verify her/his work. This can be done through, but not limited to, oral examination or discussion, or any other action deemed necessary. If the student fails to prove the authenticity of the work, then the Instructor will apply the academic misconduct rules as mentioned in the AUM Student Handbook which may include awarding the work a zero grade.
 You will also be held responsible if someone else copies your work – unless you can demonstrate that you have taken reasonable precautions against copying.
 For a detailed description of academic misconduct please refer to the undergraduate AUM
Student Handbook.
VI. GRADING SCHEME
Overall project weight is 30% of the overall course Grade
 Deliverable 1 Presentation for Part A 10%
 Deliverable 2 In-Class demonstration 08%
 Deliverable 3 Final Report 12%
6 AUM Academic Projects Academic Year: 2018-2019
VII. DETAILED RUBRIC
OVERVIEW OF THE MARKING SCHEME FOR THE PROJECT
Project Deliverable 1
Mark Total
Presentation (ppt) File Submission
No Submission 0
Late Submission 1
Submission On Time 2
Presentation Length
Too long/Too short 1
+/- 4 mins 2
+/- 2 mins 3
Logical Structure and Clarity
Little or no logical structure, poor sentence construction, difficult to extract information 1
Poorly structured, confusing prose, information can be extracted with perseverance 2
Satisfactory structure, prose conveys information successfully, occasionally confusing 3
In general, well structured, talk easy to follow, rarely confusing 4
Clear and logical presentation, articulate prose, interesting to view 5
Review of Literature
Little or no evidence of literature review 1
Patchy review, overview of few relevant papers with no critical appraisal 2
Satisfactory review, concise review of relevant papers, limited critical appraisal 3
Good, concise review of relevant papers, some critical appraisal, set into context of project 4
Excellent review, concise critical review, set into context of project, identifying gaps in knowledge 5
Scientific Conventions
Little or no coherent referencing and use of technical terms 1
Patchy/incomplete referencing and use technical terms, frequent mistakes 2
Satisfactory referencing and use of technical terms, minor mistakes 3
Good use of referencing and technical terms, occasional mistakes 4
Excellent referencing and use of technical terms, few, if any, mistakes 5
Summary of Progress to date
Little or no evidence of summary of progress 1
Patchy, some evidence of progress but lacking continuity 2
Satisfactory, concise and coherent summary of progress to date 3
Good, concise and coherent summary set into context of project 4
Excellent, concise and coherent summary set into context of project with view to future work 5
Forward Plan
Little or no evidence of forward plan 1
Patchy, some evidence of forward plan but vague and or confused 2
Satisfactory, concise and coherent forward plan with some specified objectives 3
Good, concise and coherent forward plan with clearly defined objectives 4
Excellent, concise and coherent summary, clearly defined objectives, set into context of project 5
7 AUM Academic Projects Academic Year: 2018-2019
Project Deliverable 2
Mark Total
Demonstration Length
Too long/Too short 1
+/- 4 mins 2
+/- 2 mins 3
Organization and Structure
Little or no structure / organisation, talk largely difficult to follow 1
Patchy / inconsistent structure / organisation, talk frequently difficult to follow, often confusing 2
Satisfactory structure, talk occasionally difficult to follow, sometimes confusing 3
Well structured, talk easy to follow, rarely confusing 4
Excellent structure – little room for improvement 5
Results
Little or no results, did not meet basic project aims 1
Patchy results, achieved some of basic project aims 2
Satisfactory results, achieved most of basic project aims 3
Commendable results, achieved basic and most of more demanding project aims 4
Excellent results, achieved more demanding project aims and advanced beyond these 5
Analysis
Little or no analysis of data 1
Patchy analysis, questionable reliability 2
Satisfactory analysis, reliable conclusions 3
Commendable analysis, able to set conclusions in context of current understanding in field 4
Excellent analysis, evidence of original contribution to or development in field 5
Delivery
Poor, such as to render talk largely unintelligible 1
Patchy / inconsistent, often difficult to comprehend aims, results and conclusions 2
Satisfactory, conveyed aims, results and conclusions in largely understandable fashion 3
Good, conveyed aims, results and conclusions, in clear fashion 4
Excellent, confident and fluent presentation of aims, results and conclusions 5
Use of visual aids
Little or no use of visual aids 1
Patchy / inconsistent, sloppy production, ineffective at communicating content 2
Satisfactory, adequate standard of production, conveys basic content 3
Good, well produced, effectively conveys content and enhances talk 4
Excellent, meticulous production, conveys content in professional fashion 5
8 AUM Academic Projects Academic Year: 2018-2019
Project Deliverable 3
Mark Total
Literature Review
Problem statement severely underdeveloped, absent of focus, task unclear 1
Marginal focus. Relevance of topic explained, problem statement poorly developed 2
Task definition could improve. Satisfactory knowledge, some gaps and omissions in review 3
Subject valid and relevant. Sound knowledge and good understanding of subject area 4
Clear statement of problem and associated objectives 5
Methodology
No justification for selected methodology. Inadequate data collection 1
Little justification for selected methodology. Poor understanding of methodology and implication 2
Some justification and rationale for methodology. Evidence of basic understanding of values 3
Appropriate selection of and justification for methodology. Clear rationale and understanding 4
Correct selection of and justification for methodology. Full understanding of values 5
Contents/Knowledge/Understanding
No understanding of the project as titled. Confused conceptual thinking/inadequate knowledge 1
Little understanding of the project. Conceptual framework incomplete. Inappropriate use of data 2
Evidence of some understanding of the tasks and adequate coverage of the project issues 3
Good knowledgeable account of the project as titled. Ample coverage of the subject matter 4
Excellent understanding and insight knowledge of the subject matter. 5
Critical Analysis, Discussions
Weak and unacceptable analysis, inadequate use of evidence for discussion 1
Limited or logically inconsistent analysis. Superficial critical evaluation of results 2
Appropriate analysis but limited. Limited critical awareness results. Clear presentation of findings 3
Clear presentation of findings. Competent analysis. Evidence of ability to evaluate results 4
High level analysis using appropriate techniques. Critical competence. Strong evidence base. 5
Conclusion
Absent conclusions. No recommendations 1
Relatively deficient and unsupported conclusions, evidential or logical 2
Clear presentation of conclusions related to evidence. Results mostly linked to objectives 3
Logical conclusions predominantly based on evidence. 4
Clear presentation of fully justified findings. Logical conclusions based on research evidence 5
Structure and Presentation
Unacceptable layout in terms of structure and logical argument. No reference 1
Poor layout in terms of structure and logical argument. Wrong referencing format 2
Generally good layout. Conforms to appropriate length, literacy style. 3
Correct, clear English. Clear and competent expression. Correct reference to sources 4
Excellent layout. Conforms to all technical specifications 5
The post Ballistic Transport In Carbon Nanotube Metal-Oxide-Semiconductor Field-Effect Transistors (Cnt-Mosfets) appeared first on Lion Essays.
 
“Looking for a Similar Assignment? Get Expert Help at an Amazing Discount!”

Ballistic Transport In Carbon Nanotube Metal-Oxide-Semiconductor Field-Effect Transistors (Cnt-Mosfets) was first posted on April 25, 2019 at 6:00 pm.©2019 “Lion Essays”. Use of this feed is for personal non-commercial use only. If you are not reading this article in your feed reader, then the site is guilty of copyright infringement. Please contact me at support@Lion Essays.com

[ad_2]

Source link

 

"Is this question part of your assignment? We Can Help!"

Essay Writing Service
ORDER NOW