Queensland University of Technology Science and Engineering Faculty EGB 210 Fundamentals of Mechanical Design Warman ball collection, sorting and delivery concept presentation Version 1.0, 6 March 2017 1. Introduction You will use the first 6-steps of the Design Process (Karsnitz 2013) to solve the problem of collecting, sorting and delivering the balls in the 2017 Warman Student Design and Build Project. You may refer to the latest version of the Warman Competition Rules 2017 in Blackboard for more details. You will work individually and produce a 6-page presentation/portfolio of your proposed design .You may use Word, PowerPoint, etc., provided your final submission is in A4 pdf format. There is no limit to the amount of information included in the page limit as long as it is well presented and reads easily. The 12-Step Design Process (Karsnitz 2013) 1. Define the problem 2. Brainstorming / problem solving techniques for devising potential solutions 3. Researching the problem and generating ideas 4. Identify criteria and specify constraints 5. Explore possibilities 6. Select a viable approach 7. Develop a design proposal 8. Make a model or prototype 9. Testing and evaluating 10. Refining 11. Creating/building/making 12. Documenting the design process and results The due date for this assignment is day’s end Wed 29 March 2017 (Week 5) via the Blackboard Turnitin item found in the Assessment folder. The format of your submission should be in the form of a portfolio presentation as suggested by Karsnitz 2013 (reproduced in Fig 1). 1Fig.1 Example pages from design portfolios (Karsnitz 2013) You will be graded on content and presentation. Content will consider how well you have followed the design process stages and the quality of your ideas. For example: • Have you interpreted and defined the problem properly based on the information provided in the competition rules? • Have you applied problem solving methodology like brainstorming, lateral thinking, TRIZ, synectics, etc. to explore different approaches to solving the problem? 2• Have you researched existing mechanisms and techniques for solving the problem? • Have you developed realistic criteria and constraints for choosing your final design approach? • Have you used a decision matrix to identify the most creditable solution? • Is your final design feasible given the information presented? Presentation considers how well you communicate both the design process and your solutions to the design problem to your audience. • Do you present the right balance of information; i.e. the right amount considering the limited presentation/pitch opportunity (6 pages)? • Are your headings concise and logical? • Are descriptions relevant and to the point, with attention to spelling and grammar? • Is the quality of your sketches and drawings to a high standard? • Are sketches and drawings planned, properly laid out and annotated? • Does the quality of presentation instil confidence in your ability to produce a quality, working device? All these factors will be considered in allocating a grade for this piece of assessment and have been summarized in the attached CRA. This assessment does not require you to make an oral presentation. 3EGB210 Assignment 1 CRA – Individual problem solving presentation Grade 7 (≥85%) 6 (≥75%) 5 (≥65%) 4 (≥50%) 1-3 (<50%) Criteria 100 85 84 75 74 65 64 50 49 0 A) Content Task completed to highest standard, with: o Evidence of complete understanding of the design process o Excellent use of multiple problem solving techniques o Excellent and relevant research demonstrated o Comprehensive identification and selection of criteria and constraints for problem solution o Excellent decision making process to select most viable solution o Extremely convincing feasibility of selected solution Task completed very well, with: o Evidence of comprehensive understanding of the design process o Excellent use of one, possibly two problem solving techniques o Significant relevant research o Significant identification of criteria and constraints o Solid decision making process with most viable solution obtained o Highly convincing feasibility of selected solution Task completed to a good standard, with: o Evidence of understanding of most elements of the design process o Evidence of effective problem solving methodology o Some evidence of research o Effective identification of criteria and constraints with some inconsistencies o Effective decision making process with a viable solution o Feasibility of selected solution good with additional development Task completed satisfactorily, with: o Evidence of adequate understanding of elements of the design process o Limited evidence of basic problem solving methodology o Little in the way of research, relying mostly on own ideas. o Insufficient or some wrong criteria and constraints identified o Decision making process partly flawed, with possibility of a better solution o Feasibility of selected device marginal Task not completed satisfactorily, with: o Little or no understanding of the stages of the design process o Little to no evidence of knowledge of problem solving techniques o No research or relies solely on self-generated ideas o No criteria or constraints, or irrelevant to problem solution o Inadequate or flawed evidence of decision process o Provided final solution not feasible or none provided B) Presentation o Optimal use of opportunity to present information o Precise, balanced layout and concise, informative headings and annotations o No spelling and grammar mistakes o Superb sketches and drawings, planned and drafted before finalisation o Excellent contrast, choice of colours and fonts. o Overall presentation gives excellent confidence in individual’s problem solving capabilities o Appropriate length and detailed information presented o Well planned layout with accurate and informative headings and annotations o Rare grammar and spelling mistakes o Neat, well-presented drawings and sketches that adequately convey information required o Contrast, colours and fonts that make it easy to read o Overall presentation is strong making a good impression of individual’s design and problem solving capabilities o Appropriate length with some irrelevant information presented o Planned layout, with some imbalances; good headings and annotations. o The odd spelling and grammar mistake o Good drawings and sketches that communicate concepts adequately o Good choice of contrast, colours and fonts with minor anomalies that might need revision o Good overall presentation, possibly with some minor doubts about individual’s capabilities o Slightly off page limit with some irrelevant information provided o Poorly planned layout with rambling headings and annotations, or lacking in adequate information o A few spelling and grammar mistakes o Untidy drawings and sketches or some missing information o Choice of contrast, colour and fonts that needs significant improvement o Adequate overall presentation with some concerns about individual’s design and problem solving capabilities o Totally off page limit or mostly irrelevant information provided o No planning of layout, deceptive headings and annotations. o Frequent spelling and grammar mistakes o Messy drawings and sketches with significant missing information o Little or no attention to presentation of colours, contrast and fonts o Overall poor presentation which leaves significant doubts about the individual’s design and problem solving capabilities A) and B) have equal weighting Report Mark /20 _______________ Comments:_______________________________________________ 4