ENGG1100 ENGINEERING DESIGN DOCUMENT 2 of 3 Assessment (The Details) In this document: Everything that you want to know about the assessment for ENGG1100; you should not need to look anywhere else. If you can't find what you need here, ask your project leader. In Document 1: The semester schedule, a summary of assessment, and where to go for help In Document 3: Project details – the briefLJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 2/69 Table of Contents 1 Plagiarism Module (Pass/Fail, Individual) 4 2 Logbook (14%, Individual) 5 2.1 Requirements 5 ENGG1100 LOGBOOK MARKING RUBRIC – Paste this in the front of your logbook 7 ENGG1100 LOGBOOK FEEDBACK RUBRIC – Paste this in the front of your logbook 8 2.2 Logbook Examples 9 3 Preliminary Investigation Report - PIR (20%, Individual) 14 3.1 Requirements for All Students 14 3.2 Project Specific Requirements 16 3.2.1 Project A 16 3.2.2 Project B 16 3.2.3 Project C 18 3.2.4 Project D 18 ENGG1100 PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION REPORT RUBRIC (Week 4) 19 3.3 PIR Examples 20 4 Templates (3%, Individual) 26 5 Engineering Ethics (3%, Individual) 28 6 Project Scheduling Package (Pass/Fail, Team) 29 Build Risk Assessment Checklist (Adapted: CRCMining 'TAKE TWO' Checklist) 30 ENGG1100 PROJECT SCHEDULE PACKAGE RUBRIC 32 7 Peer Assessment (Applied to Team Marks, Individual) 33 7.1 Peer Assessment overview 33 7.2 Formative PAF feedback (Week 8 Project Session, Compulsory) 35 8 Demo Day (30%, Team) 36 8.1 Overview 36 8.2 ABB/STC – Manufactured Component (P/F, Team submission, Wk 9) – All students 36 8.3 Milestone and Demo Day (5 + 25%, Week 9 and 13) – All students 39 8.4 Milestone - Project Specific Requirements 39 8.4.1 Project A 39 8.4.2 Project B 42 8.4.3 Project C 42 8.4.4 Project D 44 8.5 Demo Day - Project Specific Requirements 44 8.5.1 Project A (20% Prototype + 5% Trade Show) 44 8.5.2 Project B 46 8.5.3 Project C 48 8.5.4 Project D 50 9 Final Report (30%, Team) 52 9.1 Requirements for All Students 52 9.2 Project Specific Requirements 55 9.2.1 Project A 55LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 3/69 9.2.2 Project B 55 9.2.3 Project C 57 9.2.4 Project D 57 ENGG1100 FINAL REPORT – ASSESSMENT SHEET 58 9.3 Final Report Examples 60 LIST OF TABLES/ FIGURE Table 1: PIR requirements (Project A) ............................................................................................................. 17 Table 2: Portfolio Package – Submission details ............................................................................................. 26 Table 3: Engineering Ethics - Submission details............................................................................................. 28 Table 4: How to interpret your PAF score ....................................................................................................... 34 Table 5: ABB STC Component Rubric.............................................................................................................. 38 Table 6: ABB STC Report Rubric...................................................................................................................... 39 Table 7: Milestone assessment (Project A) .................................................................................................... 40 Table 8: Trade show assessment (Project A)................................................................................................... 42 Table 9: Milestone assessment (Project B) ..................................................................................................... 43 Table 10 Milestone assessment (Project C).................................................................................................... 43 Table 11: Milestone assessment (Project D) ................................................................................................... 44 Table 12 Project A Demo Day Marking Rubric. .............................................................................................. 45 Table 13: Oral presentation marking rubric (Project B) .................................................................................. 47 Table 14 Demo Day assessment (Project B) ................................................................................................... 47 Table 15 Demo Day assessment (Project C) ................................................................................................... 49 Table 16: Demo Day assessment (Project D)................................................................................................... 51 Figure 1: Intro to the ABB STC (Phases and tasks)........................................................................................... 37LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 4/69 1 Plagiarism Module (Pass/Fail, Individual) The UQ Academic Integrity tutorial must be completed by 1700 on Friday 10th March. Go to www.uq.edu.au/integrity/login and use your student login to access. You must complete the tutorial to pass ENGG1100. It underpins submitted work at The University of Queensland, which must be properly referenced and attributed. Your Preliminary Investigation Report will not be accepted if this tutorial has not been completed. PLAGIARISM IN ANY COURSE IS PENALISED. Plagiarism is a serious offence; should it be identified in any of your submissions, you will be subject to penalties as outlined in UQ policies. The Academic Integrity Tutorial will help you understand how to correctly reference your work. Although you are encouraged in many courses to discuss issues with your team, you must do your own calculations and research, and write your own report with your own tables and figures. In many courses, you will be required to submit work through Turnitin. Turnitin compares your work with all of the major textbooks, journals, and past student work. Some lecturers will set up Turnitin so that you can see the Originality Report and allow you to resubmit to Turnitin should you find unreferenced work in your report. We will do this in ENGG1100 but be warned that after your first submission, Turnitin takes 24h to release an updated Originality Report. In previous years, a number of Preliminary Investigation Reports were identified as containing plagiarism. They were submitted to the Executive Dean and each student was given a formal hearing and suffered consequences commensurate with the severity of the plagiarism. Some students used work from past years and in these cases, the student who originally completed the report was also given a formal hearing and suffered consequences as per UQ policies where it was found that they had knowingly allowed for their work to be plagiarised.LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 5/69 2 Logbook (14%, Individual) 2.1 Requirements Submit: Monday 8th May before 1700 via EAIT assignment chute. Print out a cover sheet from the Blackboard link; include your full team name (e.g. P05-Red). Why a logbook? Engineers keep logbooks of ideas, processes, job details, conversations etc. as part of their profession. If a question is asked years after you have completed a project, you can consult your records of events, prove where Intellectual Protocol (IP) was generated, or retrieve important information quickly. Our graduates often tell us how useful this practice is in the workplace. What do I need to do? Purchase a hard covered A4, bound book and put any documentation concerning your ENGG1100 project in it. Include design work, any important information, and team management documentation. Paste in sketches, computer outputs, minutes of team meetings, Gantt charts etc. and annotate them with your notes. Make Regular Entries Take your logbook with you everywhere and always record notes (including those from lectures, workshops and seminars)/ thoughts/ prior art references etc. directly into it. IT DOES NOT NEED TO BE NEAT – real logbooks very rarely are. Visualise Often Whenever possible - use sketches to express your ideas. Brain writing, layout sketches, and diagrams also count as visualisation. Capture Design The logbook is the medium for recording your thoughts and work. Make sure you capture the development of your design: experimentation, calculations, computer aided design (CAD) or modelling. Use print outs from computer packages and paste into your book. Add notes/ comments to the drawings, numbers, tables, graphs etc. This will cause you to review and reflect on your work. Capture Teamwork/ Project Management Always take your logbook with you to team meetings. Paste in the meeting agenda and annotate during the meeting. Update your Gantt chart; record your tasks and work progress. Team roles, project goals, and work activities should also go in your logbook. Your/Team Work Only Only include your or your team's design work. This may include photocopies of other team member's work. Info from other sources can be included as long as it is annotated to show how it is relevant and you include the reference. Index Your Work Include an index (with page numbers) at the front of your logbook so that it is easy for you to find particular pieces of work. Take Stock/ Reflect You need to take stock regularly by asking the questions; What (have I done)?, So What (is the significance of it)? and Now What? (where do I go from here). Don't forget to:  date each entry;  make sure your reflections are seen (and marked): begin a new page and head it 'Reflection';  take your workbook with you everywhere and record notes/ thoughts etc. directly into it; and  annotate anything that you paste in. Marking/ Feedback: Your logbook will be marked as per the Logbook Marking Rubric (Page 7) in Week 10 and returned to you in Week 11 in your project session. You will obtain weekly formative feedback on your logbook from your tutor in your project session as per the Logbook Feedback Rubric (Page 8). They will date stamp and sign the last entry each time this happens.LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 6/69 Your logbook must achieve at least the grade below that aligned with your total marks for ENGG1100; your final grade will be adjusted accordingly. For example, if your total for ENGG1100 is 86% (a grade of 7) and your logbook achieves only 63% (a grade of 5), your final grade will be a 6. In 2014, we noticed that many students had spent the night before the due date compiling their logbook. This is not what we intended when we specified this piece of assessment. Therefore, there are checkpoints recorded throughout semester to stop this practice. Resubmission: If your logbook mark will cap your final grade, or if you achieved less than 45% (i.e. a grade <3), you may resubmit at the end of Week 13 as we would rather you learnt from your mistakes and were given a second chance to demonstrate mastery than fail the course. You will need to:  draw a line through the next blank page in your marked logbook;  write on this page 'Week 12-Week 13' as we will only be looking at how you use the logbook in the final two week's of semester;  use your logbook for the next two weeks: write up a couple of reflections, take notes when your team meets, write in the results of any testing that you're doing, put in who is doing what for the final report and the prototype test/build/ demonstrate, draw some process diagrams etc.;  take care to address those areas that failed in your previous submission;  print out another 'Logbook' assignment cover sheet and in the 'Message to your Lecturer' write 'Resubmission'; and  resubmit your logbook via the EAIT chute by 1700 on Friday 2nd June. We will mark resubmitted logbooks as per the original rubric. You won't get any more marks but the restriction on your grade will be lifted commensurate with your logbook. For example:  your logbook received 4/15: this is a grade of 2 and hence you cannot achieve higher than a grade of 3 overall;  you resubmit your logbook and attract a mark of 8/15 - a grade of 4;  the original 4/15 is retained for your final mark upon which your overall grade will be based; BUT  your final grade may now be up to a 5.LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 7/69 ENGG1100 LOGBOOK MARKING RUBRIC – Paste this in the front of your logbook Name: Project Session: Team: Mark: /15 Marker: Criteria Comments Mark Appropriate Media/ Well maintained To get full marks: glue everything, number pages, date each entry, have an index with page numbers. /1 Well Used (regular entries) For full marks: around 45 full pages across semester. Use page check from template marking rubric. 0/2 >75% compiled in week before submission; 1/2 if between 75 and 50% compiled in week before submission. Photocopies of reports etc. spread across multiple pages are counted as 1 page unless they are heavily annotated. /2 Visualisation For full marks have >6 visualisations across semester. YES: anything that uses lines, arrows etc., mind maps, organisation charts, annotated diagrams from other sources, CAD drawings etc.. NO: Bulleted lists, equations, design brief drawings. /3 Design For full marks have >6 design calcs/ considerations. YES: equations, sketched dimensioned drawings, budget calcs, conceptual workings etc., some visualisations NO: Project meeting notes, design brief summaries (material that's not own work), Manufactured Component information /3 Project Management Processes and Practices For full marks >9 pieces including annotated minutes of meetings, Gantt charts, Belbin results, work allocation, budget calculations, etc. Print outs that have not been annotated will count as 0.5. /3 Reflection For full marks >3 meaningful reflections (at least 0.5 page) that cover the 3 questions: What happened, So what (does this mean for me and the project), and Now what (will I do/ have I learnt)? /3LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 8/69 ENGG1100 LOGBOOK FEEDBACK RUBRIC – Paste this in the front of your logbook Name: _________________________________ Student Number: ____________________________ Project Group: __________________________ Team:_____________________________________ On each week that a check is due, tutors will:  draw lines through any blank spaces in your logbook up to your last entry;  initial and date stamp the last entry in your logbook;  fill in the number of pages completed in your logbook since the last check; and  comment on any area in your logbook that needs attention. Week Tutor initials Date Logbook : Areas needing attention 2 # Pages completed: _____ 4 # Pages completed: _____ 6 # Pages completed: _____ 8 # Pages completed: _____ LOGBOOK AREAS: 1. Maintenance – everything stuck in, pages numbered, index current, entries dated 2. Usage – evidence of continual actual use (Record number of pages completed since last check. Pages >75% full = 1; Pages 20%-75% full = 0.5; Pages <20% full = 0; Reports printed out and stuck over multiple pages = 1 unless heavily annotated.) 3. Visualisation – sketches, annotated print outs, mind maps etc. 4. Design – concepts, calculations, ideas etc. 5. Project Management – minutes of meetings (annotated), Gantt charts (annotated) etc. 6. Reflection – regular reflection (at least one per check), meaningful reflection etc.LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 9/69 2.2 Logbook Examples 2.2.1 Well maintained: Make sure you have an index with page numbers and dates. Example 1 Logbook table of contents (Full mark towards 'Appropriate Media') 2.2.2 Visualisation: Sketches or other forms of visualisation should be used regularly. They should be annotated and relevant to design, project management, and idea creation. Example 2: Design visualisation (Full mark) Example 3: Brain Dumping visualisation (Full mark) 'Full mark' indicates that the example would constitute 6 of the 6 visualisations required in the logbook (see p4 rubric). This convention is used for the rest of the logbook examples.LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 10/69 Example 4: Design visualisation (Full mark) 2.2.3 Design: The logbook should include clearly laid out calculations with evidence that ideas are progressively developed. Design is also shown in Examples 2, and 4. Example 6: Design calculations (Full mark) Simple visualisation Dimensions and units Assumptions/ constants Units Critical review of calculations Example 5: Project Management visualisation (Full mark) Don't forget to include your initial research for the PIR! Make sure that you reference these notes well.LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 11/69 Example 7: Design calculations (Full mark) 2.2.4 Project Management: There should be evidence of the project management and teamwork process, such as Gantt charts and meeting minutes. For full marks, annotate and update them. Example 8: Gantt Chart (Full mark) We want to see your design develop from concept through to details for prototyping and/ or scale up. X Should be annotated (e.g. highlight your input or mark up/ add details) Critical evaluationLJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 12/69 Example 9: Annotated minutes of meeting (Full mark) 2.2.5 Reflection: There should be regular and meaningful reflections that carry thoughts forward: what have I done? What is the significance of it? And where do I go from here? Example 10: Reflection (Half mark) Printed out and pasted in Annotations Identified for easy marking Identification of problem – The 'What' and 'So What' have been completed X 'Now What?' missing – i.e. how you will solve the problemLJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 13/69 Example 11: Reflection (Full mark) Example 12: Reflection (Full mark) Where to? Why is it important? What have I done? Personal reflection – including this sort of connection will almost certainly get you full marks.LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 14/69 3 Preliminary Investigation Report - PIR (20%, Individual) Read the MEA Writing Guide resource on Blackboard before starting your PIR. It has essential guidance on the formatting of professional engineering reports. Your PIR will not be accepted until you have completed the plagiarism module 3.1 Requirements for All Students What is it? For the first 4 weeks of semester you will work individually on your project. You will define and scope the problem, undertake literature research and analysis, perform a preliminary feasibility calculation, and compile your findings and work in a report. This report will be used by your team to underpin your design work in the remainder of the semester – perhaps your background research also may be of use in the final report. Submission: Both hard and soft copy submission are required:  submit a hard copy of your report to your project leader at the beginning of your Week 4 project session1; and  submit a soft copy of your report to Turnitin via the ENGG1100 Blackboard site. You will have a chance to resubmit this report should you find some unreferenced work in your report. Content and report sections: The sections below have been chosen as they map directly to the marking criteria but you are welcome to nuance these as you see fit:  Title page  Executive Summary (1-page max)  Table of Contents  1. Introduction including a 1-paragraph introduction to the report, the aims of the report, and the contents of the report (~1-page)  2. Problem definition: a reiteration of the design problem identifying goals, outputs, functions and needs and associated technical, social and economic issues; include the background to the problem with in text referencing2 as appropriate (~2 pages);  3. Project scope: a clear indication of what you will address in your design (in scope), what you won't be covering (out of scope), and any assumptions that you will be making (~1 page);  4. Literature search: collection and analysis of any relevant literature that may underpin your design; include both technical information as well as solutions that already exist; use in text referencing (~3 pages);  5. Feasibility Calculation3: this calculation will be a ball park estimation of the requirements of your design or the size of the final unit or similar depending on your project showing that a solution of the problem is feasible; include an appropriate sketch4, any engineering design assumptions, and necessary equations (~2 pages with calculations in an appendix); 1 Every year students who have to submit their PIRs in sessions earlier in the week (e.g. P01 students who will submit on Tuesday) complain that they are disadvantaged in comparison to those students who have later project sessions (e.g. P11 students who submit on Friday). However, the four weeks for submission of the PIR is counted from when you first receive your project brief. This happens in your Week 1 project session and hence if we made the submission date a single day, those students in later sessions would be disadvantaged. 2 Referencing is required whenever you use words, facts or figures from literature. A single author is quoted in text by (Smith, 2010), two authors by (Smith and Jones, 2010) and more than two authors like this (Smith et al., 2010). 3 These feasibility calculations will be specific to your project group and will be outlined by your Project Leader. 4 A sketch is drawn without instruments or software. However, you may use a drawing package. There will be no penalty for not using instruments or a software package but engineering drawing conventions, such as those discussed in class, must be employed.LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 15/69  6. Conclusions and Recommendations: summarise what you have found and what work is still to be done (~1 page);  References; and  Appendices. Remember your audience and their level of knowledge. Academics and tutors will be marking your report and we are not interested in reading about things such as basic engineering techniques as we already know these things. Report length: The total page length of the body of the report (Sections 1. to 6.) should not exceed 10 pages. Page counts less than this are acceptable as long as the required information is covered. Your report should avoid any unnecessary 'dead-weight'. For example, don't include anything that is not directly related to your project such as research that proves to be fruitless or not relevant. Appendices, which are not included in the 10-page limit, are for supporting information and not a place to put any report overrun. The penalty for placing important information that the reader must be aware of in the appendices will be a whole grade reduction in the 'Presentation and Communication' section of the marking template. Appendices may be handwritten or typed, as long as they are legible and logically structured. Presentation: A professional engineering report is required. The use of a word processor is mandatory. Use:  Times New Roman (12 pt), Arial (12 pt) or Calibri (11 pt) font  All four margins 20mm  A4 page size  Single or 1.5 line spacing Reports that do not use this formatting will not be accepted. They will not be marked and you will attract a late penalty until a report formatted as above is submitted. Remember to:  Present data in tabular format rather than prose.  Be precise and refer to the data at hand – don't use vague, motherhood statements.  Quantify your statements. Don't use relative terms: 'very large', 'small', 'expensive' etc.  Tables and graphs should be numbered and have a title (e.g. 'Figure 1. Layout').  Graph axes should be labelled and have appropriate units.  There should be no spelling or grammatical errors.  SI units should be used for all numerical values.  Watch significant figures – what matters to an engineer: 4279 kg or 4.3 t?  In general, calculations should be in the appendices; methodology/ equations and final results should be in the report.  All abbreviations and acronyms should be spelt out in full the first time they are used.  All sources of information in the report should be referenced using the APA style (See the MEA writing guide on Blackboard).  Figures, tables, and diagrams can be imported from other sources but must be referenced in their titles (e.g. 'Figure 1 Location of proposed plant, Smith (2000)', or 'Adapted from Smith (2000)' if you have changed the figure). Referencing (APA Style):  Journal paper: Blamey, A., & MacKenzie, M. (2007). Theories of change and realistic evaluation: Peas in a pod or apples and oranges? Evaluation, 13(4), 439-455.  Book: Archer, M. (2000). Being Human: The Problem of Agency. Cambridge: University Press.LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 16/69  Website: Engineers Australia. (2011). Stage 1 Competency Standards. Retrieved 16/05/2013, from https://www.engineersaustralia.org.au/about-us/program-accreditation#standards Marking: The report will be marked by project leaders and tutors as per the following rubric. All marks will be moderated to ensure that there is no marker or project group bias. Although the marking template is very prescriptive in terms of what is required, there is a 5% bonus for an 'innovative extra' that enriches the submission. As this is to encourage you to be creative, there is no further information on what this might look like as this would then also become prescriptive and not innovative. (You may like to 'flag' this innovation in your submission to ensure that we are aware of your additional effort.) Resubmission: You must achieve at least 50% for the PIR to pass ENGG1100. If your first attempt attracts a mark of less than 50%:  you will need to resubmit your PIR at the beginning of your project session in Week 6;and  resubmitted PIRs attract a maximum mark of 50% (assuming that they are of passing quality). 3.2 Project Specific Requirements 3.2.1 Project A The contents of the PIR, particularly the literature review, sketch and feasibility calculation sections will depend on the discipline you nominate in Week 1. Table 1 shows the details of the expectations for each of these discipline-specific sections. You should indicate on the front of your report which column in the table you have addressed (e.g. Software, Electrical 1, etc.). Note that:  mechatronic students may choose any column;  mechanical students may choose Mechanical (1 or 2); and  electrical students may choose Electrical (1 or 2). 3.2.2 Project B i) Literature Search As part of your research, you should investigate the project setting by collating information about the villages of East Santo, Vanuatu, from cultural, social, geographical, political and economic viewpoints where relevant. The PIR requires you to demonstrate an understanding of the difficulties faced when working cross-culturally and the importance of community engagement in all stages of the project. You are required to demonstrate that you understand the nature of the community and indicate how this will impact on your design and what needs to be taken into account to ensure uptake of your final design. ii) Feasibility Calculation: In addition to the generic requirements for the PIR, you will need to show appropriate engineering estimations and calculations for the (all values in SI units unless otherwise specified):  volume of hot spring water to be treated daily to supply a normal village,  product water flow rate (L/d) and composition,  required mass removal rates for the various contaminants,  chemical requirements (e.g. additives, reagents etc.),  waste generated by the system (e.g. sludge, spent reagents etc.),  energy required to run the system,  rough sizes for major equipment (vessels, pipes, etc.), and  rough cost estimate per litre of treated water: use capital costs and operating costs for chemical and fuel requirements over the life of the equipment.Project A/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 17/69 Table 1: PIR requirements (Project A) Software Electrical (1) Electrical (2) Mechanical (1) Mechanical (2) Mechatronic Literature Search (General) All students must provide a brief (1 page) literature review and background research into the implementation of the "big picture" design – are there any similar vehicle on the market? What sort of vehicle work in the application field? Are there designs in other fields that may be applied in this application? (Discipline) In addition to addressing open ended questions you must propose at least 2 more open ended questions relevant for your discipline and include these in your Literature review. Learning Goal: - understand how to write simple software. - understand how to search a given area. Suggested questions: - what algorithms exist that provide automatic control of vehicles, robots or objects? - what search pattern should your vehicle use? Learning Goal: - understand how to calculate DC motor power consumption. - understand how much energy is stored in various devices. Suggested questions: - what is the most appropriate energy storage? - how to manage power consumption between various devices? Learning Goal: - understand how sensors interact (i.e. what output do they generate) - understand how sensors function (what they measure). Suggested questions: Which sensor is most appropriate for integration with Arduino? - What sensor is most viable to find magnetic targets? Learning Goal: - understand how to design a simple chassis. - understand how to quantify chassis performance metrics (weight, strength). Suggested questions: - What is the most appropriate chassis design for the vehicle? - What is the most appropriate material? Learning Goal: - understand how various drive systems work. - understand how force, torque and speed are transferred between different power train components. Suggested questions: - What is most appropriate drive system for the vehicle? (motor(s), gearbox, belt drive, etc.) Learning Goal: - understand what makes up a mechatronic system. - understand how to control various actuators. Suggested questions: - What is the most appropriate target retrieval system? - How should you use sensors to maximise coverage? Design Sketch All students must provide a sketch showing their concept for the whole vehicle and specifically how their system interfaces with the rest of the vehicle Flow chart or logic diagram describing the artificial intelligence used by the automated vehicle. It should include how it should respond to sensor inputs with motor control and detecting the target. A circuit schematic with key elements of electrical design (incl. circuitry, sensors, power supplies and motors) following standard conventions. Development boards may be shown as blocks, but all required connections between boards must be shown and labelled according to pin-out names on respective boards. All power supplies should be shown. A circuit schematic with key elements of sensor design (incl. sensors, power supply circuitry and connection to on-board electrical systems) following conventions. Development boards may be shown as blocks, but all connections between boards must be shown and labelled according to pin-out names on respective boards. A sketch of the physical layout of the vehicle should be shown, including estimated dimensions and construction materials. This should show considerably more detail than the sketch showing your vision for the overall vehicle design. An isometric 3 view sketch of the mechanical drive system showing the motor, gears, and chosen propulsion system. A sketch of the sensor system showing target size and location of magnet. Sketch of the target collection system showing how it accommodates different size and shape targets, how targets are stored and how they are dumped. Feasibility Calculation Feasibility calculation should assess adequacy of Arduino Uno processor (ATMEGA328), and development board for this application based on logic chart. The following items should be considered: navigation, input/output pins, clock speed, and memory. Select suitable power supply system. Estimate current requirements of all circuit elements (as shown in the sketch). Use calculations to show selected power supply provides capacity for at least two (2x) 5 minute operational periods. Use calculations to justify sensor selection (range, sensitivity, directionality, interference, dimensions, power and voltage requirements etc.) The weight of all elements of the design will be estimated. A calculation will be completed to estimate the mass of the vehicle and the location of the centre of mass. Provide calculations showing that the vehicle will not tip over when on the ramp. Estimate the requirements for drive system to adequately cover the test area in the given time. This should include required motor torques, speeds and gearbox ratios. Design an experiment to confirm the calculations. A suitable system to retrieve the magnetic targets should be chosen. A feasibility calculation should be performed to show how the systems work together to ensure the target is able to be dumped. Integration Describe how your system integrates with other sections of the design (e.g. software, power system, sensors, mechanical system) – i.e. what does your system depend on and what does it enable? Conclusions and Recommendations Recommend whether the product is able to be completed with the available resources, and therefore whether the company should continue to the prototype development phase of the project. You should recommend which algorithm the development team should adopt You should recommend which power supply system the design team should adopt You should recommend which sensor system the design team should adopt You should recommend which vehicle design, and materials the design team should adopt You should recommend what drive system the design team should adopt. You should recommend what grasping system the design team should adopt.LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 18/69 Moreover, you will need to produce:  mass balances for water and each key component of your water source (total dissolved solids (TDS), sodium, potassium, calcium, magnesium, carbonates), and  a preliminary process flow diagram of water and other materials (e.g. contaminants, additives, by-products and wastes as relevant) for your conceptual hot spring water treatment system. Mass balances will be discussed in detail in Week 4 and Week 7 seminar sessions. 3.2.3 Project C Project C requires teams to design a moveable bridge as part of the Oxley Creek Transformation Project. Therefore, the PIR should address the:  dimensions required for human access/ use,  structural design of the bridge,  opening mechanism,  materials of construction, and  overall mass of the structure. The Feasibility Calculations must show engineering estimations and calculations of the:  overall mass of the structure,  quantities of material required,  loads (self and applied), and  cost estimate. Engineering Sketches may be hand-drawn or computer generated. They must be annotated, dimensioned and must include:  a plan view including abutments,  a side view showing main structural members and abutments,  a section view showing bridge dimensions at full scale, and  the opening mechanism. 3.2.4 Project D In addition to the generic requirements for the PIR, your introduction should include a review of mining operations, and the applications of the mining machine used in this project. The literature review should cover required background research, and also demonstrate an understanding of the constraints of use of the mining machine used in this project. Your feasibility calculation section should include relevant calculations, and also two or three potential designs for the prototype, or full designs for specific parts of the machine (mechanisms etc.).Project A/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 19/69 ENGG1100 PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION REPORT RUBRIC (Week 4) NAME: ____________________________ TEAM: __________________________ MARKER: ________________________ MARK /20 Criteria (Weight) 0 None 1 Poor 2 Poor/ Mixed 3 Satisfactory 4 Good 5 Excellent Information skills (5/20 total) Literature search – Section 4 (3/20) No review. Limited research, 1-2 refs, single source, no critical thinking Evaluation not complete, at least 3 refs, 2 sources Sound evaluation, ≥ 5 refs, variety of sources, critical thinking evident Fully researched and critiqued, ≥ 8 refs from variety of sources Fully researched, including system requirements - ≥10 refs References (2/20) No reference list. Reference style is not followed. Reference style mostly followed correctly Reference style is used correctly – some errors Reference style used correctly – 1 or 2 errors Reference style is used correctly – no errors Technical content (11/20 total) Problem definition– Section 2 (3/20) Aspects: goals, needs, outputs, functions Issues: technical, social, economic Missing Limited definition – a couple of aspects/ issues covered. Poorly understood. Patchy coverage, some aspects/ issues overlooked. Not complete. Sound coverage, varying depth across aspects/ issues but generally workable Good coverage of all aspects/ issues. Very good understanding of problem. Insightful, all aspects and issues covered including perhaps system requirements and community understanding Project scope – Section 3 (2/20) Missing Poorly defined, unclear, missing point Limited understanding, does not match project requirements Adequate – minor omissions only – mostly achievable Full coverage – addresses issues well, assumptions clear Full coverage – optimised scope and insightful assumptions Feasibility calculation – Section 5 (4/20) No feasibility calculation. Calcs are not presented. No methodology/ approach. Feasibility calculation poorly realised: unworkable and detail poor. Data not used to justify approach. Calcs mostly incorrect or not present. SI units not used or units not given. Limited feasibility calculation – patchy detail, mostly incorrect. Some justification provided. Full calcs not presented; few assumptions stated. SI units inconsistent. Feasibility calculation mostly correct, detail satisfactory. Easily understood justification. Major assumptions stated. SI units mostly used. Feasibility calculation sound with good detail. Concise, easily understood justification of approach. Calcs correct; assumptions clearly stated. SI units used. Feasibility calculation innovative with extra details. Concise, insightful justification of technical content. Calcs correct, all assumptions stated. SI units used. Design sketch (2/20) No drawing Drawing inappropriate or poorly executed Drawing has some relevance but with major errors/ omissions Sound drawing, relevant, minor errors only. Engineering conventions used. Drawing(s) correct and relevant to design, engineering conventions used. Perfect drawing(s) used to enrich design, highly professional Presentation and Communication (4/20 total) Executive Summary (1/20) Missing Incomplete and of no use to busy executive Of limited use to busy exec, poor structure, many refs to report Covers all major findings, limited need to read report for clarification Minor omissions only – busy exec could survive with just this page Excellent summary of report – busy exec fully informed with no need to read report Spelling and Grammar (1/20) Extremely poor - illegible Numerous errors – mostly illegible Major errors – some parts illegible Minor errors – mostly legible Spelling and grammar mostly correct - legible Grammar correct with no spelling errors. Overall Presentation (2/20) No resemblance to professional report Data presentation/ language not professional, poor structure Not pitched correctly and/ or poorly structured, little signposting Slightly overlong or lacking in detail – structure/ signposts could be improved Report well structured, professional in look – pitched appropriately, minor errors Report concise, follows given structure, good data presentation, no mistakes – perfectLJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 20/69 3.3 PIR Examples 3.3.1 Literature Search: This section should be fully researched and insightful, use ≥ 10 references from a variety of sources and include system requirements. It must be more than just a summary of articles; there must be critical evaluation of the work and connection to the aims of the project (relevancy). Example 13: Summary only – no demonstration of critical thinking (3-4/5) The rudimentary approach to adding language capabilities to a robot is using speech recognition technology. The robot is trained to recognise an operator's voice and matches known voice commands with actions, using a look-up table. Aside from the problems that still exist with Speech Recognition technology, the key problem with this type of system is that it requires large, rigid data structures that don't correspond with the fluidic way that humans use their language syntax. Kai-Yuh & Mavridis (2004) programmed a robot arm manipulator to respond to spatial and action words, for example "lift, block, behind". Skubic et al. (2004) programmed a mobile robot to understand spatial words and make statements about its environment, such as "the object is in front of me". Other research uses a human-inspired, cognitive science approach, which takes our knowledge of how concepts are represented in a human brain and applies them to build more advanced robotic brains. The robot is taught some words, and attaches these, along with visual input from its camera, to a neural network; a sort of cognitive map for a robot. Steels (2001) proposed the idea of … Example 14: Evidence of critical evaluation and thought (5/5) Wang et al. (2005) succeeded in implementing an interferometer on an "atom chip" 5 cm long and 2 cm wide, containing a series of wires and mirrors as shown in figure 4. In their experiment, a dilute Rubidium-87 gas was cooled to 0.45 µK before being moved onto the chip. Once on the chip, the atoms were cooled further until they transitioned into a BEC. The wires on the chip created a magnetic field which served both to trap and guide the condensate. Standing light waves used to manipulate the BEC were created through the use of the mirrors. This setup allowed Wang et al. to separate the two BECs for 10 milliseconds with a maximum separation of 120 microns without compromising the integrity of the interference pattern. This experiment shows that it is possible to use BEC in atom interferometry on a very small scale. A problem that remains, however, is the initial cooling of the Rubidium-87 atoms from room temperature down to 0.45 µK, which does not take place on the chip but instead must be carried out externally. 3.3.2 References: A wide range of sources should be used to enrich the report. Referencing should be without errors. Correct in-text referencing Values and Units Variety of references X Relative term – always quantify X Year missing Marks shown for each example are indicative only as often the full section is not shown. They are marks for the section under which the example is posted only. For example, the mistakes in Example 17 would be docked from 'Presentation' and not 'Project Scope'.LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 21/69 Example 15: Reference list (5/5) Albanese, A. (2009) Fairer compensation for air travellers, Media release, 29 January, Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government, Retrieved 30/01/2014 from http://www.minister.infrastructure.gov.au/aa/releases/2009/January/AA007_2009.htm Bourassa, S. (1999) Effects of child care on young children, Proceedings of the third annual meeting of the International Society for Child Psychology, International Society for Child Psychology, Psychology, Atlanta, Georgia, pp. 44-46 Daniel, T. (2009) Learning from simpler times, Risk Management, 56(1), 40-44 Huffman, L. (1996) Processing whey protein for use as a food ingredient, Food Technology, 50(2), 49-52 Reid, D., Parsons, M. & Green C (1989) Staff management in human services: behavioural research and application, Charles C. Thomas, Springfield 3.3.3 Problem Definition: The aspects (goals, needs, outputs, functions) and issues (technical, social, and economic) should be covered, including system requirements and community understanding. Example 16: Problem definition (4/5) x.1 Task Identification The vision of the Kooma people is the redevelopment of the Bendee Downs site to act as an economically viable regional hub. The main focus of this redevelopment is a business centred on eco-tourism to bring employment opportunities to the people. This vision also includes the provision of housing infrastructure. It is hoped that each of the 16 clans will possess a house onsite, and that accommodation for a total of 25 people, 5 staff and 20 overnight visitors, will also available onsite. Furthermore, full amenities will be required for a general range of 50-100 weekly visitors to the site (EWB, 2010). x.2 Task Analysis x.2.1 Pre-existing Water Sources The water sources in the vicinity of Bendee Downs can be categorised into two distinct forms: ground or bore water and surface waters from creeks and waterways. Several fresh water bores exist in the Bendee Downs area all of which are available for use with varied feasibility. Bendee Downs itself overlays a large rock formation being a part of the Great Artesian Basin. While water quality from the main bore sunk into this formation is suitable for drinking after rudimentary treatment, … x.2.2 Pre-existing Sanitation The existing sanitation system on Bendee Downs will require a serious upgrade to service the usage outlined in the design brief; however, in 2003 the sanitation system at Murra Murra was upgraded to allow usage by 30 people. The system entails the transportation of waste to two buried septic tanks, each containing an electrical stirrer to move and mix the waste, before pumping liquid effluent through an underground pipeline for spraying on a nearby grassy paddock, where it is vaporised and sterilised by the heat of the sun. A similar larger scale system may be feasible for the Bendee Downs project; however, this system needs to be creative to prevent contamination to the surrounding wetlands or the underground bore aquifers. Risk of contamination to the wetlands is quite high due to its position 50 metres from the current septic site. A variety of sources: online, journals, conference papers, & books Alphabetical order X Punctuation missing. Ensure punctuation correct. Counted as an error. System elements identified and understood Social issues identified Project details correctly summarised Technical issues identified X Economic issues missing All web reference elements present All authors spelt out in full X Bullets could have been used for easier data accessLJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 22/69 3.3.4 Project Scope: This should be achievable and insightful. Assumptions should be clearly identified. Example 17: Project scope – some presentation mistakes (4/5) This project will be dealing specifically with a Solar Thermal Energy System powered by a parabolic mirror array. The array will focus the sun's energy upon a pipeline loop filled with oil driven by a small pump, upon heating the oil will pass through a heat exchange. The actual process of the heat exchange and power generation are to be taken 'as is' and will require no design; therefore the only portion of the system that requires design will be the hot oil loop/storage facility and the parabolic mirror array. List of Design Components:  Parabolic Mirror array including size, shape, material, orientation and number of mirrors.  Any sun tracking device used in the system to increase the efficiency  The piping used for transporting the oil and the oil itself should be investigated and the effects that this will have upon the system efficiency identified.  Any pumps required to drive the system.  There is a possibility that a storage facility for delayed use could be incorporated for use at night. The popular method of molten salt solutions should be investigated.  A pressure release system may be necessary for the heated oil and the molten salt solution.  The system should be maximized for greatest efficiency versus cost, producing a minimum of 10kW as the generators output. Assumptions:  From the heat exchanger to the generator ('Black box' region), the efficiency is to be taken as electrical power produced/heat supplied = 0.12.  For initial calculations the heat loss through the pipes will be taken as zero and the absorption of the sun's energy as 0.9; this will be rectified in later reports to a more accurate value.  The pipe system is taken as a closed loop, therefore no pump head loss. Example 18: Project scope – use of table to clarify scope (4/5) The design problem has been defined as the development of a waste management system that is sustainable and responsibly disposes of the accumulated waste at the site. An ongoing strategy is also necessary to ensure waste continues to be managed effectively in future (Devitt 2007). The recovery of useful resources should be a key design feature. Table 2 summarises what will and will not be addressed by the design. Table 2 Factors addressed by design In Scope Out of Scope  Disposal of organic waste  Disposal of inorganic waste  Recovery of useful resources  Treatment of wastewater  Generation of energy from recovered products  Use of animal dung as a feedstock Design assumptions identified Design boundaries clear X Assumptions missing X Formal report requires a sentence to introduce bullets X Bullets should be the same tense/structure. These are fragments and sentences X Units? Is this an efficiency? Table introduced in text X Not clear what is being referenced Overview statement Overview statement X Out-of-scope missing Design components = In scopeLJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 23/69 3.3.5 Feasibility Calculation: Feasibility calculation/s should be correct, all assumptions stated, and SI units used. Example 19: Feasibility calculation – correct use of appendix (5/5 if summary appears in report body) Appendix B Feasibility calculations Daily water usage can be divided into the following areas. When calculating the total daily water consumption, the use of water for different groups of people was considered. Calculating Waste Water Volume SOURCE L/PERSON/D Toilet 20 Shower 63 Hand Basin 6 Washing Machine 13 Laundry Tap 2 Kitchen Tap 12 Dishwasher 5 TOTAL WASTEWATER 120 (Adapted from Fane, S 2008) Daily Visitors = (Σ (toilet + hand basin)) x 100 = 26 x 100 = 2600 L/d Overnight Visitors = (Σ (toilet + shower + hand basin + kitchen tap)) x 20 = 101 x 20 = 2020 L/d Permanent Staff = Σ (toilet + shower + hand basin + kitchen tap + dishwasher) x 5 = 116 x 5 = 580 L/d Total daily water consumption = 2600 + 2020 + 580 = 5200 L/d 3.3.6 Design Sketch: Highly professional, sketches should be used to enrich design. Example 20: Circuit drawing (5/5) Example 21: Air flow diagram (5/5) Calculations in appendix. Include a summary in the main body SI units References Estimation Clear assumptions/process Drawings accepted but only sketches requiredLJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 24/69 Example 22: Elevation/ Process diagram (4/5) Example 23: Plan and Concept drawing (5/5) Ground Water Slow Sand Filter Effluent Sand Filtration Control Excellent – can be improved by estimated dimensions/values/sizes X Needs to be augmented by plan or process or flow or dimensions. More detail required.LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 25/69 3.3.7 Executive Summary: The summary will fully inform a busy executive, leaving no need for them to read the report. Example 24: Executive summary – excellent structure/ progression (5/5) This report was compiled to determine the most appropriate organic waste management system for Bendee Downs and Murra Murra. Information regarding the Kooma community and existing waste management techniques was sourced from a collection of books, journals, reports and online resources. This information drew attention to the factors which will inform the system design including:  the site's remote location  fluctuating climatic conditions  the location of natural resources  limited income  Kooma Traditional Owner's Association Incorporated's diverse cultural responsibilities  lack of technical knowledge among community members Three management systems, trench landfill, incineration and anaerobic digestion, were selected, and their suitability in the Kooma community was assessed using the following criteria:  design, inputs and outputs  sustainability  installation, operation and management requirements and costs  social and environmental impacts Preliminary feasibility calculations determined that at full capacity (125 people/d), approximately 50 kg of dry organic waste and 5200 L of wastewater will be produced daily. It is concluded that anaerobic digestion is the most appropriate system for the Kooma community. Unlike landfill and incineration, this disposal method is carbon neutral and sustainable, without the need for additional infrastructure. Recovered resources include biogas (10 m3/day) and fertiliser, which can theoretically be produced in sufficient quantities for long term use. Installation costs are generally offset within 6-8 months of operation, and the demands on the community for operation and maintenance are markedly less than for landfill. It also has the least detrimental impacts on human health and the environment. It is recommended that one continuous load reactor, with a capacity 140 m3, is installed. The design should incorporate both a temperature control and agitation mechanism. A CHP Engine should be incorporated to produce electricity as this may provide an opportunity for revenue by increasing the amount of power able to be sold back to the grid X Do not reference the report – just summarise the findings. Design considerations Conclusions Recommendations Details/ Numbers Method/assessment criteriaLJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 26/69 4 Templates (3%, Individual) Why? The template sessions help you and your team through the engineering design process. They have been structured so that many of the problems that your team might face are pre-empted. Those students who attend and participate in these sessions learn more and undoubtedly make a larger contribution to the team than those students who do not attend. Submit: At the end of the relevant workshop (Table 2). Table 2: Portfolio Package – Submission details Assessment Piece Monday Workshop Demonstrating: Submission 1. Template A Week 1 Welcome Place your completed Template in the correct Project (P) box as you leave the Workshop (W) session. 2. Template B Week 2 Engineering design 3. Template C Week 3 Teams 4. Template D Week 4 Project Management 5. Template E Week 5 Engineering decision making 6. Template F Week 6 Engineering Materials 7. Template G Week 7 Life Cycle Analysis 8. Template H Week 8 Social sustainability 9. Template I Week 10 Failure Mode & Effect Analysis Added bonus: Retrieve your template in your project section and paste it into your logbook to have it counted in the page tally. What if I miss a workshop associated with a template? You will need to:  listen to any podcast associated with the session (go to the Learning Pathway), check the workshop/ lecture slides and talk to your friends;  download the Template from Blackboard and complete; and  submit via the relevant Help! section on Blackboard. (You will need to explain why you missed the session and, if it was for a reason other than illness or an unforseen emergency, to explain what you will do to ensure it doesn't occur again. This level of accountability is in keeping with becoming a professional engineer.) You must do this within one week of the original due date. A senior project leader will decide whether to allow your submission on the basis of your reason, review of the situation, and the number of times that it has occurred. How will the Portfolio Package be graded? Who's judging that my Templates are to the required standard? Tutors will make a judgment as to whether you have made a satisfactory attempt at each Template; we're looking for evidence that you engaged in the learning activity not perfection or neatness. What is the 'required standard' for Templates? You will receive a Fail for the template if:  there is a blank box on the template (i.e. you have failed to attempt to answer the question);  you have answered with one or two words (e.g. 'No', 'Nothing', 'Not applicable' etc.) where more thought was required; and/ or  your responses do not relate to the questions.LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 27/69 How will the number of templates I submit affect my grade?  To achieve a grade of 7, you must submit at least 8 templates to the required standard.  To achieve a grade of 6, you must submit at least 7 templates to the required standard.  To achieve a grade of 5, you must submit at least 6 templates to the required standard.  To pass ENGG1100, you must submit at least 4 templates to the required standard. Can I resubmit? You will have a week to resubmit should you fail a template. Resubmit to Lydia or Carl at the next workshop. Why so tough? 1. We want you to be successful in your studies and in industry. The timely submission of assessment pieces is of paramount importance for both. In industry, tenders handed in late will not be considered even though they may represent a substantial investment in both time and resources. 2. We want you to have at least a basic understanding of engineering design, project management, engineering decision-making, Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), social sustainability, and Failure Modes and Effect Analysis (FMEA). The Templates associated with these Learning Objectives require you to demonstrate that you understand these engineering principles/ techniques and can apply them to a design project. 3. Most of the Templates form the beginning of work that you have to do with your team for your design project. Completing these templates ensures that all your team members are up to speed with what is needed and that they will be able to contribute to the conversation. 4. UQ graduates are highly sought after by industry. Our graduates are known for being able to deliver engineering solutions to a myriad of problems on time, in budget, and to the required quality. We have a reputation to uphold and it starts in ENGG1100. Is there a 'Get Out of Jail' card? You may regain credit for one only (1x) template by submitting a 1000 word essay. To access this 'Get Out of Jail' card and receive the essay topic, you must contact A/Prof Lydia Kavanagh ([email protected]) any time up until the 2nd June. You will not be chased to make this application but will need to follow this up yourself. Essays will be due by the 16th June. No late submissions will be accepted.LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 28/69 5 Engineering Ethics (3%, Individual) As engineering practitioners, we use our knowledge and skills for the benefit of the community to create engineering solutions for a sustainable future. In doing so, we strive to serve the community ahead of other personal or sectional interests. Our Code of Ethics defines the values and principles that shape the decisions we make in engineering practice. The related Guidelines on Professional Conduct provide a framework for members of Engineers Australia to use when exercising their judgment in the practice of engineering. As members of Engineers Australia, we commit to practise in accordance with the Code of Ethics and accept that we will be held accountable for our conduct under Engineers Australia's disciplinary regulations. Engineers Australia, 2010 What do I have to do? There are 2 pieces to this piece of assessment (Table 3). You can do the reflection at any time up until the Friday of Week 6. At this stage, this part of the assessment will close and you will randomly be allocated two (2x) reflections to review. You can review these reflections any time from Monday of Week 7 until Friday of Week 11. Table 3: Engineering Ethics - Submission details Assessment Piece Due Date Submission 1. Ethics reflection (2%) Wk 6 (Fri 1700) Via Turnitin in Blackboard 2. Two (2x) Ethics reflection reviews (1%) Wk 11 (Fri 1700) Via Turnitin in Blackboard How do I do it? Go to the ENGG1100 Blackboard site. Choose 'Assessment' from the left-hand menu, and then click on the 'Ethics Reflection' folder. Follow the instructions in this folder. Who's judging that my Ethics reflection is to the required standard? Your Ethics reflection will be graded and reviewed by two of your peers. If both reviewers indicate that you have not made an adequate attempt, you will be asked to resubmit. Similarly, the reviews you submit will be read by the original authors who will indicate if you haven't given the review sufficient effort.LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 29/69 6 Project Scheduling Package (Pass/Fail, Team) Project management is an essential skill for professional engineers that allows complex projects to be delivered on time, within budget and at the required standard. It will underpin everything you do as a professional engineer. BUT the use of project management is not limited to the workplace. You will find project management an important skill for managing your university studies and an extremely necessary skill for managing large courses that require team-based submissions. We ask you to prepare this package so that you begin to develop project management skills and also so that you manage to successfully negotiate ENGG1100: submitting pieces of assessment on or before the deadline and to the required standard. You might like to begin by looking at the templates you completed individually in the Project Management workshop (W) in Week 4. What does our team have to do? There are 4 pieces to the Project Scheduling Package (PSP). Please submit them in a manilla wallet (or similar) with your team name (e.g. P06-Red) on it to ensure that nothing gets lost. 1. Work Breakdown Structure (WBS): The project has many different facets and will require many different tasks to complete. The WBS needs to detail these tasks and subtasks. A template as per the keynote lecture can be used. 2. Gantt Chart: The Gantt chart shows when each of the tasks and subtasks is to be done during the semester. It must show milestones (e.g. project meetings, submissions, team deadlines), and the critical path (i.e. those tasks that must be completed before other tasks can begin and are critical to the timing of the project). The Gantt chart can be produced using MS-Project, Excel, or any other suitable package. 3. Resource Allocation: The tasks identified in the WBS must be assigned resources. This can be done on the Gantt chart by placing the names of the people assigned to the tasks next to the task, or on a separate sheet. 4. Build Risk Assessment: Complete the attached template to identify risks associated with the Build component of ENGG1100, their likelihood of occurrence and potential severity, and the mitigating practices you will put in place to ensure that they do not occur. NOTE: This is a preliminary assessment and will need to be followed later in semester with a much more detailed risk assessment. How is it assessed? This is a Pass/ Fail submission. All reasonable submissions will receive a pass grade. If your team's submission is not deemed to be sufficient in detail OR there is a section missing, you will be asked to resubmit. You cannot pass ENGG1100 without achieving a Pass on this submission. The rubric on page 32 gives more details as to what we're looking for in your team's PSP. When are we submitting? Submit this package to your tutor during the session in Week 5. The package will be returned to you either in Week 5 or Week 6 with comments that should help you successfully manage the ENGG1100 project.LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 30/69 Build Risk Assessment Checklist (Adapted: CRCMining 'TAKE TWO' Checklist) Team Name: Date: Job Description: Job Location: Equipment/Other: Consider potential HAZARDS for YOU AND YOUR TEAM MEMBERS Tick if applicable Can I manage this hazard? Yes No Yes No 1. Can I be caught in, on or between anything? 2. Can I strain or over exert myself? 3. Does anything need to be isolated & tested for dead? 4. Can I come into contact with something that may harm me like heat, gas, fumes, electricity or stored energy (water or gas under pressure)? 5. Can I damage any equipment? 6. Can I fall more than 1.8 metres? 7. Can I slip or trip on anything? 8. Do I need additional training, qualifications or authorisation to perform the job? 9. Is there a chance I could spill or pollute something? 10. Am I concerned that something may fall on me or strike me? 11. Do I need to communicate to my surrounding workmates the risks associated with this task? 12. Could there be any uncontrolled movement? 13. Other? Can the job be completed safely? Yes No If YES, continue with job If NO, what are the hazards? If NO, complete section over pageLJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 31/69 What CONTROLS have I put in place to reduce immediate risk? 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Date: Time: Participants: Project Leader:LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 32/69 ENGG1100 PROJECT SCHEDULE PACKAGE RUBRIC Team: Marker: Mark: Pass / Fail Element (Weight) – Task allocation 0 None 1 Poor 2 Poor/ Mixed 3 Sound 4 Good 5 Excellent Work Breakdown Structure What are the key tasks? What are the sub-tasks required to complete them? Is there sufficient detail? Missing Sketchy and/ or incorrect Missing important details and/ or not fully addressed Mostly complete list – adequate analysis Complete list – will produce required product All tasks recognised – all facets addressed – contingency allowed for Gantt Chart Have the tasks been transferred? Have conventions been followed? Is there a critical path identified. Missing Not a Gantt chart – poor understanding Missing elements – patchy – poorly executed Gantt chart mostly correct – some errors. Critical path identified. Major stages/ tasks well considered. No errors on Gantt chart. Chart has been used to enrich project beyond initial conception. Resource Allocation Have all members been considered? Have other commitments (e.g. other courses, holidays etc.) been considered? (NB Can be shown on the Gantt Chart.) Missing Little thought given to task. Basic only – project direction not supported – not realistic. Workable – supports team members and commitments Comprehensive – addresses task and team Comprehensive - insightful – contingency allowed for Risk Assessment Identification and preliminary analysis of potential risks, opportunities and constraints Missing Very limited analysis – no analysis Limited analysis – obvious omissions Major issues identified – adequate analysis Good coverage – most suggestions realistic and workable Excellent coverage – good strategy for reducing risks and optimising project successLJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 33/69 7 Peer Assessment (Applied to Team Marks, Individual) 7.1 Peer Assessment overview What is peer assessment? In Weeks 6/7 and 12/13 you will receive an email sending you a Blackboard link that will allow you to assess your peers. This is your opportunity to reward members of your team who worked hard and to give feedback to any non-performers. Your scores are confidential – only an aggregated mark for each team member will be returned. What do I have to do? You will be asked to evaluate the contributions of each person to the deliverable by distributing 100 points among them for the following criteria:  Teamwork and Leadership = attendance and participation at meetings, email/ SMS/ discussion board response, ability to work with and share findings with team; ability to lead through collaboration  Contribution to overall project = including: scoping, research, design, testing, analysis, reporting, editing, final submission production. Don't forget to reward up-front work such as idea generation and literature research that may not have been used in the long run but that underpinned final work;  Timeliness = ability to meet agreed contribution times; and  Performance = standard and completeness of work. As a ready-reckoner of the Peer Assessment Factor (PAF) multiply the score that you are giving someone by the number of people in the team and divide by 100 ... now have a look at the scores in Table 4. Is this the PAF that you think they deserve? For each score that is less than 0.95 you will need to include a comment to justify your scores. If you do not, your mark may be discounted. You can mark someone down but you must justify it with a written comment. What affect will this have? The PAF is calculated by the sum of all scores attributed to a student divided by the number of criteria multiplied by 100 as per Equation 1. Given to student Student 100 Criteria Scores PAF N x   [1] In Week 7, the PAF is formative; tutors will give the team their PAFs5 in Week 8 so that you can make adjustments to your individual effort in order to increase your PAF as necessary. This PAF will have no effect on your overall mark so you still have time to get it right. The Week 13 PAF will be applied to the team's marks for the final report and Demo Day to give you your final mark as per Equation 2. Individual mark = Team mark x PAF [2] 5 The individual scores that you give to each student are confidential. Only the PAF and SAPA are disseminated.LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 34/69 What does the number mean? If you pull your own weight and undertake a similar amount of work to everyone else, you should get a PAF of 1.0. If you are leading the team and putting in extra work, you may get a PAF above 1.06. Note that for you to get above 1.0, another student will have to have lost some marks, therefore PAFs slightly below 1.0 do not necessarily mean that you have not been pulling your weight. Table 4 shows the various levels of PAFs and possible interpretations. Table 4: How to interpret your PAF score Your PAF Interpretation Comments >1.5 Alarm! Team failure. Either someone is not participating at all or you are doing all the work by yourself. Either way, learning objectives are probably not being achieved by all the team. 1.15-1.5 Super Leader/ Dominator? The team balance needs to be addressed as to achieve such a score other students are not participating or you are doing far too much. 1.05-1.15 Leader You are showing definite leadership qualities and/or have been putting in significant extra effort. 1.00-1.05 Good teamwork You are working well with the team and this has been recognised. 0.95-1.00 Acceptable teamwork You have probably only been penalised because another team member has shown leadership and put in extra effort. 0.85-0.95 Social Loafer Any PAF below 0.95 is unacceptable. You need to talk to the team, find out what has gone wrong, and redress it immediately. 0.75-0.85 Super Social Loafer As above and below. You will need to talk to the team and get them to tell you what you need to do to bring your PAF to unity. <0.75 Alarm! Individual failure! You are in grave danger of failing the course. Much work is required for you to be accepted back into the team. Start now! But couldn't the system be manipulated? A minority of students use the peer assessment to give themselves a higher PAF than is warranted or to penalise team members with whom they have disagreed. This is picked up by comparing your scores with the average of the other team members' scores – and we do this check for all PAFs. The SAPA (self assessment over peer assessment) is the score that you give yourself over the average score that your teammates give you. ( 1) Self Others Team Score SAPA Score N    [3] A SAPA of over 1.0 indicates that you believe you do more in the team than your teammates think; a SAPA less than 1.0 indicates that you undervalue your contribution. The scores for individual students are also calculated as per the SAPA (see Equation 4). Assigned individual by student A Individual over average All other team members ( 1) Team Score Ratio Score N    [4] 6 PAFs are capped at 1.1. This means you can potentially receive an additional 10% of the team marks. PAFs are capped so that we are not overly rewarding effort in place of marks for design and communication.LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 35/69 Again a ratio of over 1.0 indicates that Student A values the work of the individual more than their teammates think – this is common between friends; a ratio less than 1.0 indicates that student A may have personal conflict with the individual and undervalues their contribution. We will remove all scores that are over 15% above or below the team average where there is no justifying comment and/ or the mark appears to be unwarranted. 7.2 Formative PAF feedback (Week 8 Project Session, Compulsory) How will it work? In Week 8, the PAFs and SAPAs generated from the Week 6/7 peer assessment exercise will be returned to you as a team during your project session. You will be assigned a mentor who will lead a facilitated discussion around these scores so that your team can plan the way forward and better manage team processes for the remainder of the semester. It is a chance for underperforming members of your team to indicate how they will pick up their game, and for other team members to talk about things that need improvement and suggest ways that this can happen. Who is our 'mentor'? Your mentor will be selected based on the following criteria:  if all members of your team receive a PAF of 0.96 and above, your team will be mentored by your usual tutor in your project session;  if one or more of your team receives a PAF less than 0.96, your team will be mentored by a senior member of the ENGG1100 teaching team. This may happen outside your usual project session but we will try to schedule it within your project session; and  if you receive a PAF of 0.9 or below, you will be called (as an individual) to attend a session with one of the course coordinators. What's the penalty for not showing up? Failure to attend the mentor session in Week 8 will result in your Week 13 PAF being reduced by 0.05. For example, if your PAF is 1.02 it will be reduced to 1.02-0.05 = 0.97. (As this PAF is applied to 60% of your marks, it could result in a loss of up to 0.05*60 = 3%.) What if I have a good reason for not attending? Approval for non-attendance will only be given for medical (medical certificate required), compassionate reasons or exceptional circumstances. Exceptional circumstances could include a sporting or cultural commitment at state, national or international level, or serious personal or emotional trauma. Why? Our experience shows that if you use this session wisely, you can dramatically improve team performance and hence your team's performance in ENGG1100. However, this requires all members of your team to be present so we've made it compulsory to attend. This session is also an opportunity to learn how to resolve team dysfunction and develop your team skills.LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 36/69 8 Demo Day (30%, Team) 8.1 Overview There are three (3) parts to Demo Day: 1. Introduction to the ABB STC - Manufactured Component (P/F) in your Week 9 project session (Section 8.2), 2. Milestone Test (5%) in your Week 9 project session (Section 8.4), and 3. Demo Day (25%) in your Week 13 project session (Section 8.5). 8.2 ABB/STC – Manufactured Component (P/F, Team submission, Wk 9) – All students 8.2.1 Summary Professional engineers supply specifications to manufacturers through production drawings so that parts can be built to the correct size and fit with other components when assembled. Learning to use hand tools to build to a particular specification will be a skill of use throughout your career. In addition, recording information is an integral aspect of professional engineering practice; it allows us to revisit our work, evaluate it, and improve. At the Milestone Test each team will submit a Manufactured Component and that eventually becomes part of their prototype, and a brief report covering the manufacturing process. The report will demonstrate your team's ability to:  create a hand sketch/drawing of what you intend to make;  estimate a simple quantity such as 'resulting mass';  use units, dimensions and significant figures correctly; and  plan your manufacturing job. The Manufactured Component must be manufactured in the ABB Student Technology Centre (ABB STC). This workshop is equipped with a variety of hand tools that you can use to manufacture your prototype as well as this component. Your team will have access to the ABB STC during your project sessions in Weeks 7 and 8. These sessions are relatively short, so you must plan your work activities to maximise your productivity during your allocated time. The skills involved in manufacturing the component may appear basic if you have workshop experience. If so, then you should encourage other members of your team to do the manufacturing so that you will all be well equipped to contribute to the manufacture of your team's prototype. 8.2.2 Deliverables i) The Manufacturing Report The Manufacturing Report will be submitted at the beginning of your Week 9 Project Session. The report must be on A4 paper, bound or stapled, and have a title page that includes your team name (e.g. P11-Red), and a table with a breakdown of the tasks undertaken by each team member. It should be 5- 6 pages long and include:LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 37/69  Part A: Calculation/estimation of final mass (Student 1),  Part B: 2D Orthographic sketch of mounting block – 3 views (Student 2),  Part C: Manufacturing workflow diagram (Student 3), and  Part D: Manufacturing details (Students 4-6) including: photo(s) of the manufactured component; and a brief summary of your team's observations, difficulties and key lessons (approximately 150 words). ii) The Component Each project has different Manufactured Component specifications. These are detailed in the relevant Document 3 (Project Brief). 8.2.3 Team Roles Each team member will take on a different role as shown in Figure 1. If you have less than six members then speak to a tutor about redistributing the workload. Figure 1: Intro to the ABB STC (Phases and tasks) Phase One - Weeks 5 and 6 – In project session (Team Task) Define Task, Allocate Responsibilities, Manufacturing Work Flow Diagram (Student 1) Sketch of Part Include Dimensions (Student 2) Calculate Mass for Component Consider significant figures (Student 3) Create a Manufacturing Work Flow Diagram Including time (max 1 hour) (Team Task) Manufacturing Report Phase Two - Weeks 7 and 8 – in ABB STC (Student 4, 5 & 6) Manufacture your team's component while following your team's Manufacturing Work Flow Diagram Including time (max 1 hour) Phase Three - Week 9 – In project sessions (Team Task) Assessment - Test Fit Component - Weigh Component - Submit Manufacturing reportLJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 38/69 8.2.4 Resources Provided Each team will receive:  1 x piece sufficient to manufacture the required component, and  STC workshop time (1 h per team). 8.2.5 Online Tutorials Online tutorials will be available on Blackboard to help you with all aspects of your project. These tutorials will cover topics including:  Sketching and 2-D orthographic views;  Units, Estimating and Significant Figures;  Manufacturing Workflow Diagram;  Measuring;  Marking out;  Cutting with a hacksaw;  Filing;  Using a powered hand drill; and  Basic advice on correct and safe use of required hand tools. 8.2.6 Accessing the ABB STC To access the ABB STC you will need to complete the induction steps as per the ABB STC Blackboard Site. This can be found by clicking on "Learning Resources" on the left hand side of the ENGG1100 Blackboard page. Only three students can attend at a time and all three must have completed the induction. When you attend the ABB STC session YOU MUST BRING your student identification card, 2-dimensional orthographic sketch of your component, and your Manufacturing workflow diagram to assist in the manufacture of the part. 8.2.7 Marking Criteria Submissions will be marked according to the rubrics shown in Table 5 and Table 6. Each of the 10 criteria carries the same weighting, except mass, which carries twice the weighting of other criteria. The total mark is out of 10. Table 5: ABB STC Component Rubric Score Completion ( /1) Fit ( /1) Manufacture quality ( /1) Score Mass ( /2) 1 Complete Neat fit; Slight clearance Square ends; Clean chamfers; Smooth finishes 2 E < 5% 0.5 Incomplete Tight fit or loose fit 1 criterion missing 1 5% ≤ E < 10% 0 No submission Doesn't Fit >1 criteria missing 0 10% ≤ ELJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 39/69 Table 6: ABB STC Report Rubric Score 2-D Sketch ( /1) Calculations ( /1) Manufacturing Workflow ( /1) Summary ( /1) Photograph ( /1) 1 Neat; Correct views; All dimensions Neat & logical; Units correct; Sig fig correct; Accurate result Correct steps; Correct order; Neatly laid out Logical; Concise; Clear & comprehensive description Adequate size to show component; Appropriate view; Detail clear 0.5 1 criterion missing 1 criterion missing 1 criterion missing 1 criterion missing 1 criterion missing 0 >1 criteria missing >1 criteria missing >1 criteria missing >1 criteria missing >1 criteria missing 8.3 Milestone and Demo Day (5 + 25%, Week 9 and 13) – All students Do we have to come? Attendance is compulsory at both the Week 9 and Week 13 sessions; if you do not attend you will receive zero marks for the session you miss. It is therefore important that you ensure your tutor marks you as present. Medical certificates will be required if you are unable to attend due to illness. How will it be marked? Both parts of Demo Day will be:  marked as per the project specific requirements in the following sections;  individualised by the application of your Week 13 peer assessment factor; and  moderated between markers and project groups to remove any marking bias. 8.4 Milestone - Project Specific Requirements 8.4.1 Project A i) Overview The Milestone assessment is designed to ensure that your team is on track to participate in Demo Day. As the successful completion of Project A requires different disciplinary inputs, the Milestone will check your team's progress with respect to your: 1) prototype; 2) electrical circuit; 3) software code; 4) design drawings; and 5) manufactured component (Arduino mounting plate). Marks will be awarded on the basis of 1) above and your Peer Assessment Factor (PAF) will be applied to this mark to obtain your individual mark. Parts 2), 3), 4) and 5) will be Pass/Fail and should your team not achieve a passing grade, you will be given a week to resubmit. There is no re-take for Part 1). ii) Prototype assessment (5%) Teams will have up to 10 minutes to demonstrate or verify (through the provision of results of experiments, or any other supporting information) all the milestones detailed in Table 7.LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 40/69 Table 7: Milestone assessment (Project A) Team Name: Yes: can demonstrate, with calcs/ experiments to back it up No – Little progress, or unlikely to meet requirements. Has a basic vehicle platform been built? Does it meet the size requirements? 0.5 0 Has a drive system been designed? Is it capable of providing the necessary speed? 0.5 0 Regarding vehicle navigation: Is there a sensor system that reliably interfaces with the Arduino microcontroller board, and a navigation program written which reacts to the sensor state. (Demonstrated using a test routine) 0.6 0 Regarding magnetic target detection: Is there a sensor positioning and sensing system that can reliably react to target. This must interface with the Arduino, and a program must be written, which provides feedback as to state of sensor. (Demonstrated using test program.) 0.6 0 Has a suitable battery power supply been identified, purchased, and interfaced with the other electronics? Has total power consumption been calculated? Does the battery supply adequate power? 0.6 0 Has a test program been written (and demonstrated) which shows the ability to control the drivetrain? The ability to move forward and backward in a straight line and the ability to change direction must be demonstrated. 0.6 0 Has a target retrieval system been built? (Demonstrated). Does it meet the size restrictions? 0.6 0 Is there an integration plan, showing how all related subsystems of the vehicle will be integrated 1 0 iii) Electrical considerations (Pass/ Fail) For the milestone, you are expected to build your circuits in line with best practices. Neat handdrawings are acceptable. Your team must present:  a working circuit built in accordance with "Best Practices";  a circuit diagram; and  a layout diagram that matches your circuit with correctly identified colours. iv) Software considerations (Pass/ Fail) To successfully build the product you need to learn how to turn a process flow chart into a piece of functioning software and how to write clear, logical code. Clear hand-drawings are acceptable. Your team must present:  an Arduino with your code loaded (which demonstrates an observable output in response to a sensor input); and  a process flow chart for your code. v) Mechanical considerations (Pass/ Fail) During the engineering design process a wealth of information is generated. This can be in the form of design calculations, drawings, flow charts, wiring diagrams, test data, photos, amongst many others. ItLJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 41/69 is important to constantly record and store this information. This data may be used in subsequent reports, redesigns, or even litigation, should your product fail. Drawings may be in draft format but they should follow engineering conventions. For the Milestone you are required to show:  a general arrangement drawing showing overall dimensions, spatial arrangement of all subsystems, centre of mass and relative size of magnetic target;  Detailed drawing of mechanical drive system and target retrieval system; and  Drawings of purchased components (can be taken from internet, but critical dimensions need to be included). NOTE: The above drawings can be reused in the Final Report. vi) "Trade Show" Presentation (5%) – Peer Marked - Week 12 Project Session – Team submission Technical conferences and trade shows frequently use short presentations, or a "Pitch" as a medium to present information. Such presentations are an opportunity to get the audience interested in your product/ research, such that they want to learn more about it. The audience may be a few people gathered around, or a large audience of seated guests! In your Week 12 project session, one or more members of each team will give a 3-minute oral presentation. You may use your prototype as a prop, and one PowerPoint slide. Your oral will be followed by up to 2 minutes of questions from both tutors and your peers. In the oral you should briefly discuss background, overall design and key technical details and highlight any novel features of your design – why is it better than your competitors?  Marking: You will be assessed on the contents and quality of your presentation using the marking criteria in 8.4.2 Project B The Week 9 Milestone evaluation will assess the status of design and construction, and not performance. The questions in Table 9 will provide the basis for evaluation of the progress. Evidence in terms of sketches, detailed drawings, calculations and pictures will be required. The milestone will be marked according to the rubric given with Table 9. Week 11 equipment testing opportunity – optional, not for assessment: During the Week 11 project session, teams will be given the opportunity to test their equipment with synthetic hot spring water of similar quality to the spring water that will be provided for Demo Day in Week 13.  . Your team's final marks will be an average of that from both students and tutors – you will not mark your own team.  Attendance: Attendance is compulsory. Students who do not attend will receive 0 marks for the Trade Show Presentation. Ensure that you get your name marked off the roll. Students who have a genuine reason for not attending must notify their Project Leader as soon as possible. UQ policies and procedures regarding reasons for absences will be followed.  Peer assessment: Your peer assessment factor will be applied to your team mark in order to calculate your individual mark.LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 42/69 Table 8: Trade show assessment (Project A) Team Name Communication: How well did the team present the material? Was it professional and clear? Score / 5 Comprehension: Did you understand the overall design approach that the team used to solve the problem? Score / 5 Engagement: Did the presentation make you want to see the craft in action or did you drift off? Score / 5 Q&A: Did they answer questions to your satisfaction? Score / 5 Total (Score/20) 8.4.2 Project B The Week 9 Milestone evaluation will assess the status of design and construction, and not performance. The questions in Table 9 will provide the basis for evaluation of the progress. Evidence in terms of sketches, detailed drawings, calculations and pictures will be required. The milestone will be marked according to the rubric given with Table 9. Week 11 equipment testing opportunity – optional, not for assessment: During the Week 11 project session, teams will be given the opportunity to test their equipment with synthetic hot spring water of similar quality to the spring water that will be provided for Demo Day in Week 13. The purpose is to allow each team to assess the progress and performance of their systems and thus determine whether any parts need to be fine-tuned, modified or even re-designed to meet the output water quality and production rate. No marks will be given for this testing but it is an opportunity that we highly recommend to you. 8.4.3 Project C Teams will have up to 4 minutes to present progress of their project to Week 9, followed by up to 2 minutes of questions and answers. Presentation should include visual elements (e.g. PowerPoint, photos, or videos). You should provide results of experiments or any other supporting information to tutors if they are not included in the presentation. Note that the 4-minute time limit will be strictly observed; overrun in your presentation will not be allowed. Presentations will be marked by project leaders and tutors as per Table 10. Marks will be awarded as follows:  Excellent (able to be demonstrated, fully justified, mostly complete, well produced) – full marks;  Sound (evidence of progress which may lead to a suitable design, partially complete, satisfactory) – half marks;  Poor (little progress, unlikely to meet requirements) – 0 marks.LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 43/69 Table 9: Milestone assessment (Project B) Question: 3/3 2/3 1/3 0/3 Has the team developed an understanding of spring water chemistry? Evidence can be given with diagrams, sketches, or orally. The team can fully explain the processes occurring in water during treatment Partial understanding of purification process Little understanding of purification process/ water composition No understanding of purification process and composition Has the team selected a process train for the project? Evidence should be given with a decision matrix. Excellent decision matrix justifies process selection Decision matrix is incomplete or contains some errors. Decision matrix is poorly done or majorly flawed No decision matrix, no basis for selection. Is there preliminary engineering evidence (e.g. a process flow diagram and mass balance for the whole process)? Both process flow diagram and mass balance are complete Partial process flow diagram or partial mass balance Absence of process flow diagram or mass balance Absence of process flow diagram and mass balance Has the team designed and sized a solid-liquid separation system? Evidence should be given by sketches/drawings and related calculations. The item is >80% designed, drawings and calculations are professional Item is >50% designed, partial drawings or minor flaws in calculations Item is < 50% designed, incomplete or poor sketches, major flaws in calculations No sketches/ drawings, no calculations Has the team designed and sized a process for spring water treatment to meet the specs for drinking water? Evidence given by sketches/drawings and related calculations. The item is >80% designed, drawings and calculations are professional Item is >50% designed, partial drawings or minor flaws in calculations Item is < 50% designed, incomplete or poor sketches, major flaws in calculations No sketches/ drawings, no calculations Has the team designed a system for the waste removal/disposal from the treated spring water? Evidence should be given by sketches/drawings and calculations. The item is >80% designed, drawings and calculations are professional Item is >50% designed, partial drawings or minor flaws in calculations Item is < 50% designed, incomplete or poor sketches, major flaws in calculations No sketches/ drawings, no calculations Is the prototype under construction? > 50% built 30-50% built 10-30% built Construction not started Table 10 Milestone assessment (Project C) Assessment criteria Performance criteria available Marks awarded Marks Design selection Final design choice made and justification provided. Justification shows minimised cost, all criteria considered, material selection and assembly possible in given time. 2 Resources Some materials required for prototype have been purchased. 1 Construction Model construction initiated and evidence of preliminary testing shown. 2 Calculations Evidence of analysis of loads applied to bridge structural members. Estimate of load capacity and full scale cost. 2 Presentation Presentation is well produced and engaging. 2 Q&A Team able to provide justified responses to all questions posed 1LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 44/69 Your final mark will be the average of marks awarded by project leaders and tutors. 8.4.4 Project D In project D, the week 9 Build Milestone assesses only the status of design and construction of your machine; performance is not measured. In order to assess this, your team is required to put together a presentation that includes the required items according the criteria provided in Table 11. The presentation can be a conventional PowerPoint presentation, a video, or any other audio-visual extravaganza that you create. In addition to your build progress, your manufactured component is assessed on this day. Table 11: Milestone assessment (Project D) Criteria (Weight) (1) Presentation Prototype building progress 0 (None) No presentation Have not started building 1 (Poor)  No powerpoint /videos /physical demo  Poor justification of component design.  Poor speech. Started building but none of the main components(2) are complete. 2 (Poor/ mixed)  Poor powerpoint /videos /physical demo  Poor justification of each component design.  Poor presentation. Finished building one component but have not started building any other. Attempt is made to demonstrate one degree of motion. 3 (Average) Satisfactory:  powerpoint slides /videos/physical demo of each completed component,  justification of each component design,  presentation, and responses to questions. Finished building one component(2) and have started building another component/s. Attempt is made to demonstrate one degree of motion(3). 4 (Good)  powerpoint slides /videos/physical demo of each completed component,  justification of each component design,  presentation, and  responses to questions. Finished building two components(2) but have not started building another component/s. Successfully demonstrated one degree of motion(3). 5 (Excellent)  Excellent powerpoint slides /videos /physical demo of each completed component.  Clear and reasonable justification of each component design.  Outstanding presentation.  Prompt and clear responses to questions. Finished building at least two components(2) and have started building other components. Successfully demonstrated at least two degrees of motion(3). Manufactured Cpt COMPLETE INCOMPLETE Notes 1. Group will get the lowest mark of the two criteria. 8.5 Demo Day - Project Specific Requirements 8.5.1 Project A (20% Prototype + 5% Trade Show) A timetable for prototype demonstration will be available on Blackboard prior to the event. Attendance is compulsory. Each team will be marked using the rubric in Table 12.LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 45/69 Table 12 Project A Demo Day Marking Rubric. Completeness and compliance Score Width SMW = Specified Max. Width AW = Actual Width Length SML = Specified Max. Length AL = Actual Length Ground Based Safety Autonomous Expenditure < $150 2 AW ≤ SMW AL ≤ SML YES No exposed sharp edges/ pinch points 1 AW > SMW + 1 mm AL > SML + 1 mm Some sharp edges or pinch points YES YES 0* AW > SMW + 5 mm AL > SML + 5 mm NO Sharp edges and pinch points exposed** NO NO Mark /2 /2 /2 /2 /1 /1 Completeness and compliance SUB-TOTAL /10 * Any team that scores 0 in any category above will have their Demo Day mark capped at 50% ** Any unsafe vehicle will not be demonstrated and receive zero marks for pre-test and performance Quality Score Mechanical Build Electrical Build Software Code 10  Components edges smooth/ straight, unless intentional.  Components joined neatly  Components joined securely  Components appropriately size  Appropriate material selection  Moving parts appropriately restrained  Majority of parts easily sourced  Wire length appropriate  Wires neatly routed  Power/ control wires identifiable  Neatly soldered joints  Sensors appropriately mounted  Actuators appropriately mounted  Power supply appropriately mounted  Controller appropriately mounted  Code properly commented throughout  Logical sequence of code execution  Efficient code expression  Functions separated in code to aid in debugging  Libraries/ sample code referenced  All values including constants declared as variables 8 1 criterion missing 1 criterion missing 1 criterion missing 6 2 criteria missing 2 criteria missing 2 criteria missing 4 3 criteria missing 3 criteria missing 3 criteria missing 2 4 criteria missing 4 criteria missing 4 criteria missing 0* >4 criteria missing >4 criteria missing >4 criteria missing Mark: /10 /10 /10 Quality SUB-TOTAL & Initials: /30 Pre-Test Works reliably Works sometimes Didn't work Score & Initials Switches to / from test mode 2 1 0 /2 Move forwards 2 1 0 /2 Move backwards 2 1 0 /2 Turn left 2 1 0 /2 Turn right 2 1 0 /2 Stop 2 1 0 /2 Detect magnetic target 2 1 0 /2 Retrieve target 3 1 0 / 3 Dump target 3 1 0 / 3 Pre-Test SUB-TOTALs: /20LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 46/69 Performance Magnetic targets collected Magnetic targets retrieved Magnetic targets dumped NonMagnetic targets collected Score Time (mins) to collect all targets No. Interventions Score Points 1 per Target 0.5 per target 0.5 per target 0 5 Score = 5 – t 0 10 1 3 1 7 2 1 2 4 3 0 3 0 Mark: /10 /5 /5 /5 /5 /10 Performance SUB-TOTAL: /40 8.5.2 Project B i) Overview Prototype demonstration will occur in Week 13, on Wednesday May 31st, 1000 – 1400 (TBC), and will be at an outdoor location on the campus (TBA). Please be there early to have your rigs in place by 1100. Your team will:  give a 3-minute oral presentation on your system to the examiners;  be asked a number of questions relating to your prototype;  be provided with approximately 0.5 L of hot spring water mix (Document 3);  have a maximum of 60 minutes to produce drinking water and demonstrate method of testing; and  provide a sample of drinking water product to undergo independent testing to determine whether it meets the specifications. Demo Day will be organised as follows:  Set-up and presentations: o Prototypes should be ready for testing by the end of the first hour. o 3-minute presentation by each team followed by questions.  Prototype testing: o At a signal from the examiners, each team will be given 0.5 L of hot spring water mix. o Within 60 minutes, each team needs to submit 3 items to the teaching team: 1. Product water from the purification process (as specified in Document 3); 2. Waste products from purification process (as specified in Document 3); 3. Demonstrate effectiveness of water quality test (as specified in Document 3).  Measurements: o Sample analyses will be carried out. o Results will be displayed on a scoreboard. Your Demo Day score (out of 25) will be based on the following:  0-5 marks – Oral presentation and Q&A  0-20 marks – Performance of equipment/ processLJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 47/69 ii) Demo Day oral presentations (3 minutes max + questions) Your oral presentation will be marked as per Table 13. As any member of your team can be asked a question and your team will be judged on their answer, you should ensure that everyone is aware of all aspects of the project and can explain them to the examiners. The examiners reserve the right to deduct points from your oral score if your prototype does not meet the claims in your 3-minute presentation. Table 13: Oral presentation marking rubric (Project B) Score 0 0.5 1 Design claims Prototype design claims unreasonable/ do not meet design objectives and specifications Prototype design claims reasonable and meet MOST aspects of the design objectives and specifications Design claims of the prototype reasonable and meet ALL aspects of the design objectives and specifications Technical understanding Did not demonstrate a technical understanding of how prototype works Demonstrated a moderate level of understanding Demonstrated a high level of technical understanding of their prototype Community engagement Little consideration of community acceptance of proposed solution Considerations of cultural/ social nature were key factors towards technology selection All phases of the project involve the community; education programs are envisaged Presentation style and communication aids (NOTE) Poor presentation that did not flow well and lacked professionalism. No aids Engaging presentation of moderate quality, mostly follows a logical progression. Good visual aids Very engaging, with logical progression and high level of professionalism. High quality of aids supported presentation Questions Unable to answer most questions. Lack of understanding by many team members Able to answer most questions/ most members showed moderate level of understanding Provided in depth answers to questions demonstrating a high level of understanding by all team members NOTE: Communication aids include: the prototype, a poster, a PowerPoint on a laptop, plans, drawings etc. Be creative! Just remember that this presentation will be outside with no access to power. iii) Demo Day prototype performance Table 14 will be used to evaluate the performance of your equipment/process. Table 14 Demo Day assessment (Project B) Measured parameter Weight Requirement for stated score 20 15 10 5 0 Time to complete test/ submit samples (min) 10% < 30 30-40 40-50 50-60 > 60 Turbidity / suspended solids in solidliquid separator effluent (NTU) (1) 15% < 1 1 – 5 5 – 10 10 – 20 > 20 Total volume of harvested solids (inc. water) (mL) (2) 10% < 20 20-50 50-100 100-250 > 250 Total dissolved solids (TDS) in treated water (mg/L) (3) 15% < 500 5000-1000 1000-2000 2000-4000 > 4000 Sodium in treated water (mg/L)(4) 15% <250 250-1000 1000-1500 1500-2000 > 2000 Volume of treated water (L) (5) 10% > 0.3 0.25-0.3 0.2-0.25 0.15-0.2 < 0.15 pH of treated water (6) 10% 7.1-7.5 ± 0.3 ± 0.6 ± 0.9 > ± 0.9 Overall cost of prototype (AU$)(7) 10% < 50 50-75 75-100 100-150 > 150 Self-testing method % accuracy 10% >90 90 - 80 80 - 70 70 - 60 < 60LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 48/69 Notes: (1) Turbidity of the liquid effluent is an indication of the effectiveness of the solid-liquid separation process: the higher the turbidity, the poorer the separation. Teams are required to collect a 10 mL sample from the liquid effluent of the solid-liquid separator. (2) The lower the volume, the lower the water content in the solid fraction and the better the settling characteristics of the solids. (3) Total dissolved solids (TDS) will be measured with a conductivity probe. TDS should be below 500 mg/L for the treated water to meet drinking water guidelines. (4) Sodium (Na+) concentration will be measured with a portable Na+ probe. Sodium reduction is important to guarantee water is of drinking water quality for health and taste purposes. (5) This is the total volume of the produced treated water for drinking out of an initial 0.5 L. (6) The pH should remain in a physiological range of 6.5 – 8.5. (7) The maximum cost should be AU$150; past experience suggests that you should be able to produce your prototype for well below $100. The cost will be verified through a Bill of Materials (BoM). During the Week 12 project session, each team will submit a BoM, inclusive of all items that have been directly used in the prototype. Detailed guidelines on how to prepare a BoM will be given during the project session of Week 10. The BoM must be supported by original receipts. 8.5.3 Project C Assembly and testing of models will take place in Week 13 as per the procedure outlined in Document 3: Project C Brief. Models will be assessed against the following criteria as per the details in Table 15: (1) Materials are used as specified in the brief; (2) Bridge model has an aesthetic, and innovative design; (3) Bridge model, prior to opening and loading, has required clearances and gradient; (4) Bridge model, prior to opening and loading, is stable and can support 50 N (5 kg) load at any point on the deck; (5) Bridge model has smooth finishes and accurately fitting connections; (6) Bridge model, prior to loading, opens and closes smoothly; (7) Bridge model, under live load of 100 N (10 kg), has required clearances and gradient; (8) Materials are used efficiently; and (9) Bridge model, after being subjected to load tests, opens and closes smoothly and retains required clearances and gradient. Efficient use of materials will be assessed as follows:  the serviceability limit load (Fmax, kg) does not exceed 2-times the live load; and  Load Bearing Capacity (LBC) is  3.5. LBC is calculated as ��� = � max � where m is mass of the model (kg) not including connection plates.LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 49/69 Table 15 Demo Day assessment (Project C) Criteria Marking Score (1) Materials used  List of components presented (name, quantity, density).  Bridge model made from specified materials (or exemption granted). List of components:  No = 0; Incomplete = 3; Yes = 5 Materials as specified:  Yes = No cap  No = Demo Day mark capped 50% 5 (2) Aesthetics Design is innovative, eye-catching and adds value to the environment. Standard design = 0 Standard design + innovative features = 3 Innovative, eye-catching design = 5 5 (3) Dimensional requirements (Unloaded)  Length spans the creek  Deck lateral clearance  200 mm  Head clearance  300 mm  Gradient  1:20  Water level clearance  180 mm 2 marks per item 10 (4) Bridge model stability  Unloaded model statically balanced/ stable  Supports 50 N (5 kg) load at any point Won't stand, no deck = 0 Unsteady, some weak points on deck = 5 Steady, all deck points support 5 kg = 10 10 (5) Build quality  Smooth accurate cuts  Smooth surface finishes  Well-made connections  Parts fit accurately  Abutment connections fit accurately 2 marks per item 10 (6) Bridge model open/close – before loading  Opens and closes smoothly  Open clearance 1600 mm wide (centred at mid-span) + 500 mm high from water 5 marks per item 10 (7) Serviceability under live load (100 N)  Length spans the creek  Deck lateral clearance  200 mm  Head clearance  300 mm  Gradient  1:20  Water level clearance  180 mm 4 marks per item 20 (8) Efficient use of materials Serviceability load limit Fmax = ______ kg Mass m = ______ kg Load bearing capacity LBC = Fmax/m = ______  0 = LBC  1.0  (8  LBC – 8) when 1.0  LBC  3.5  20 when LBC  3.5  Capped at 10 if Fmax  20 kg 20 (9) Bridge open/close – after loading  Opens and closes smoothly  Open clearance 1600 mm wide (centred at mid-span) + 500 mm high from water 5 marks per item 10 Total 100LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 50/69 8.5.4 Project D Demo day will occur in Week 13. All groups will be performing on the same day over three sessions. Students must be present for the entire session that they are performing in, and for the presentations at the end of the day. Exact details of the location and schedule will be made available during semester once details have been finalised. Due to the nature of the exercise, appropriate Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) must be worn on the day, this includes: closed in shoes, and safety glasses (provided). On the morning of demo day, all students are required to bring their machine and budget breakdown to the location by 8:00 am. During the next hour, the tutors will assess both the budget and risk assessment as these form part of the criteria. After this, teams will begin the demonstrations. Each demonstration will consist of a:  1-minute briefing on the attributes of their design to the judges, tutors and other students;  3-minutes in which to set up, connect and position their machine in the designated location;  5-minute period to complete cycles of moving the material from the ore pile to the dump; and  1 minute period to remove their machine from the demonstration area. Following each demonstration, the weight of moved material in the dump will be measured. Each design will be marked on the following criteria (Table 16):  maximised productivity (weight of material in the dump),  maximised design efficiency (productivity/prototype weight),  correct design specifications,  minimised cost,  robust design,  creativity and innovation in design,  simplicity in design,  stability and ease of control of design, and  demonstrated safety.LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 51/69 Table 16: Demo Day assessment (Project D) 1. Productivity: Weight of shifted material Excellent: Weight of shifted material > 4 kg Very Good: 2 kg < Weight shifted < 3 kg Good: 1 kg < Weight shifted < 2 kg Pass: 0 kg < Weight shifted < 1 kg Failure: Prototype operates but no material transfer Catastrophe: Prototype fails to operate (30) 100% 99% 83% 82% 67% 66% 50% 25% 0% 2. Design Efficiency: Productivity/Prototype weight Excellent: Efficiency ratio > 1 Very Good: 0 < Efficiency ratio < 1 Good: 0.33 < Efficiency ratio < 0.66 Pass: 0 < Efficiency ratio < 0.33 Failure: Prototype operates, but no productivity Catastrophe: Prototype fails to operate (15) 100% 99% 83% 82% 67% 66% 50% 25% 0% 3. Design Specifications: Dimensional envelope and cost Meets all design specs: Design envelope and cost. Most design specs met (Combined design criteria exceeded by 1% - 10%). Some design specs met (Combined design criteria exceeded by 10% - 20%). Design specs somewhat met (Combined design criteria exceeded by 20% - 30%). Design specs almost met (Combined design criteria exceeded by 30% to 40%). No design specs met; not close to meeting them. (10) 100% 99% 87% 86% 75% 74% 63% 62% 50% 0% 4. Build quality and robustness Carefully designed, professionally constructed. Robust design could easily withstand all hazards. Looks fantastic! Great design, neat construction. Could withstand hazards. Looks good! Good design, neat construction. No special care required. Feels solid. Passable design, construction, Generally works. At risk of failure in environment, needs careful handling. Poor design, scrappy construction. Likely to fail or break! Terrible design. Fragile. Unsuitable for operation. (10) 100% 88% 87% 75% 74% 63% 62% 50% 49% 25% 24% 0% 5. Effort, creativity and innovation Significant creativity. Novel features expand possible use of prototype. Outstanding effort, good creativity. Significant effort, some creativity. Some effort, minimal creativity. Minimal effort, no creativity. No effort. (10) 100% 88% 87% 75% 74% 63% 62% 50% 49% 25% 24% 0% 6. Simplicity of manufacturing Made entirely from easily sourced components, able to be constructed without specialist tools. No problems mass producing. Made entirely from easily sourced components. Minor problems for mass production as specialist workmanship. Mostly from easily sourced components. Unusual parts well justified. Minor problems for mass production as specialist workmanship. Includes some unusual components, or specialist workmanship, or unable to be mass produced. Very little consideration of mass production: incorporation of unusual components, specialist workmanship. Mostly unusual components, and/ or specialist workmanship. Unable to be mass produced. (10) 100% 88% 87% 75% 74% 63% 62% 50% 49% 25% 24% 0% 7. Control and stability Excellent control of all motions, no issues in stability of system. Very good control of all motions, negligible issues in system stability. Good control of all motions, minor issues in stability of system. Acceptable control of all motions, some issues in stability of system. Unacceptable control of all motions, major issues in stability of system. No control and unstable system. (15) 100% 88% 87% 75% 74% 63% 62% 50% 49% 25% 24% 0%LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 52/69 9 Final Report (30%, Team) 9.1 Requirements for All Students What is it? Each team will submit a comprehensive written report detailing your final design. The reader will need to know the initial concepts from which you selected the final design, how you justified your design selection, and how your design fits the criteria in terms of fitness for purpose and sustainability. Submission: Only one report is required per team. Both hard and soft copy submission is required:  submit a hard copy of your report via the EAIT Assignment Chute7 before 1700 Friday 2nd June; and  submit a soft copy of your report to Turnitin via the ENGG1100 Blackboard site before the above date. You will have a chance to resubmit this report should you find some unreferenced work in your report. Content of report: Your final report, as part of the 'Body of the Report' (see 'Report Sections' below), should contain:  an outline of the project scope and requirements – what your original task was, the assumptions that you made, and what you aimed to do (~1-2 pages);  a contextual and critical summary of the literature and other prior art that helped to shape the project – this can be compiled from your Preliminary Investigation Reports (~2-3 pages);  technical understanding/ concepts required to undertake design (~2 pages);  how sustainability (triple bottom line) was used to underpin the design (~1 page);  a summary of the initial design concepts proposed and justification for selection of the preferred design – you will need to use engineering decision making processes to do this (~1-2 pages);  details of your final design including appropriate drawings8, a justification of the materials used, and specifications – calculations should go in the appendices (~3 pages);  details of the full scale design and any scale-up considerations – don't forget to include materials (~2 pages)  an FMEA of Demo Day operation of your prototype based on the templates that you filled out in Week 9 (~1-2 pages);  an assessment of your design in terms of sustainability through Life Cycle Analysis of the fullscale design based on the templates filled out in Week 7/8 (~1-2 pages); and  recommendations for further work – what still needs to be designed, detailed, and/or confirmed (~1 page). Approximate page numbers for each section have been included ONLY to give you an idea of what we are expecting. This is not prescriptive however and you will not be penalised for sections with different lengths to those specified. 7 You will need to generate an assignment cover sheet and ensure that all members of your team sign it. 8 For the final report, you must have engineering drawings. Sketches can be placed in the appendix but the figures in the report cannot be drawn freehand. You must either use instruments or an engineering software package.LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 53/69 Remember your audience and their level of knowledge. Academics and tutors will be marking your report and we are not interested in reading about things such as basic engineering techniques as we already know these things. For example, you do not need to outline FMEA methodology or that for a LCA. Report sections: The report is to be set out professionally with at least the following sections:  Transmittal letter (If you still don't know what this is, Google it!)  Title page  Executive summary  Table of contents  List of figures and tables  * Introduction (scope, objectives, contents of report)  * Body of report (refer to above inclusions and assessment sheet for potential section headings)  * Conclusions  * Recommendations  References (use the APA referencing style outlined in the MEA writing guide)  Appendices (including detailed data, calculations, data sheets, templates etc.) Report length: The body of the report (as denoted by all those sections marked with an asterisk * in the above list) must not exceed 20 pages. There are no extra marks for making the report longer than it needs to be – indeed concise reports that cover all the necessary points are likely to attract higher marks. There is no penalty for a report with less than 20 pages. Your report should avoid any unnecessary 'dead-weight'. Don't include anything that is not directly related to your project; any research that proves to be fruitless or not relevant should not be included in the report. Appendices, which are not included in the 20-page limit, are for supporting information and not a place to put any report overrun. The penalty for placing important information that the reader must be aware of in the appendices will be a whole grade reduction in the 'Presentation Quality' section of the marking template. Appendices may be handwritten or typed, as long as they are legible and logically structured. You may include your individual FMEA and LCA templates in the Appendices if you believe that they are of interest to the reader. Presentation: Report presentation should be of the highest quality (using the MEA guidelines) – the use of a word processor is mandatory. Use Times New Roman (12 pt), Arial (12 pt) or Calibri (11 pt), 20 mm margins, A4 page size, and single or 1.5 line spacing. We will not accept reports that are not formatted as described – late penalties will be applied to rejected reports that need to be re-formatted. You are encouraged to present data in tabular format rather than prose. For example, the initial concepts could easily be placed in a table with headings that show the differences between the designs and/ or the specific design aims. Diagrams and figures are also very useful ways to summarise information and should be included in the main report as appropriate. These should also be of excellent quality and should be numbered, have an appropriate title, and graph axes should be clearly labelled with appropriate units.LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 54/69 LCA and FMEA: It is recommended that the FMEA (on the Demo Day operation of your prototype) and the LCA (on full-scale design) sections of the report be based on an overview of the findings of the Templates that you completed individually. In this way, the FMEA Templates could be placed in an appendix and the report could contain a table of those items identified by the team as being the most likely to occur and/ or have the most severe effects, and the proposed mitigating actions. You might also include a summary of pertinent outcomes of team discussions. Similarly, the LCA section could bring together the best template diagrams along with a table that amalgamates the embodied energy requirements drawn from the individual efforts of the team. The section would conclude with the outcomes of team discussions around environmental sustainability and methods for reducing energy requirements. The LCA has been simplified as detailed below. Your report will of course require a diagram showing material and energy flows.  Begin with a statement regarding the purpose and goal of the LCA (Step 0).  Neglect 'Raw Material Acquisition' - there is sufficient data out there on manufactured goods that takes this into account. Instead address the 'Manufacturing', 'Use' and 'Recycle/ Disposal' parts of the product life cycle and indicate material inputs, energy inputs, and solid/ atmospheric/ liquid emissions for each stage (Step 1).  Identify ONLY the energy impact of your process (not any of the other impacts that LCAs usually address: e.g. CO2 emission, ecotoxicity, acidification, solid waste etc.). Include the embodied energy of materials, any energy requirements, and references to the data source (Step 2).  Aggregate energy amounts across the life cycle of the product (Step 3).  Interpret the results – what do they mean, what needs to be addressed, what could be done to reduce numbers? (Step 4) Marking: The final report will be marked by tutors as per the rubric. All marks will be moderated; project group averages will be checked against each other and scaled if necessary. Coordinators' decisions will be final. Although the marking template is very prescriptive in terms of what is required, there is a 5% bonus for any team that includes an 'innovative extra' that enriches their submission. As this is to encourage you to be creative, there is no further information on what this might look like as this would then also become prescriptive and not innovative. (You may like to flag this innovation in your letter of transmittal to ensure that we are aware of your additional effort.) Your peer assessment factor will be applied to the report mark received by your team in order to calculate your individual mark.LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 55/69 9.2 Project Specific Requirements 9.2.1 Project A i) Design drawings The following drawings should be included in the Final Report. They may be the same drawings as presented in Week 9 for Milestone assessment or they may be substantially different:  A4 or A3 sized general arrangement drawings done using a CAD program showing a minimum of top view, side view, key dimensions and construction materials,  a detailed drawing of mechanical drive system and target retrieval system,  circuit schematic showing all electrical elements, and  a software flow chart describing the vehicle control software. ii) Design details The report should include:  an overview of design discussing the functionality of the whole system,  a description of the search algorithm, including relevant code snippets, and description of software architecture,  a description of the mechanical drive system including justification / calculations of gear ratios,  a description of the power supply system including predicted current, measured current, battery selection and configuration justification,  a description of the sensor electronics (for autonomous navigation and target detection) including a brief description of relevant sensor operation, and circuit schematics for appropriate interface with other electronics and the justification for sensor choice,  a description of the chassis design and the justification for choice of materials and fabrication techniques,  a description of the target retrieval system and the justification for choice of materials and manufacturing techniques,  drive mechanism torque calculations, and  a complete bill of materials with pricing (in an appendix). iii) Sustainability assessment Teams must perform a lifecycle analysis (LCA) of the materials they utilise in their design. Students must estimate the mass of material used in their product, and then estimate the embodied energy. Students must provide estimates for their model design, and for a full size implementation of their product (a model scale size of 1:5 can be assumed). 9.2.2 Project B i) Design Details In addition to the generic requirements expected for your Final Report you will also need to show appropriate engineering calculations specifically related to the following (all values in SI units unless stated otherwise):  volume of hot spring water to be treated daily from a water purifying process for a household of 10 people,  product water flow rate (L/d) and detailed composition,  required mass removal rates for the solid waste and various contaminants,LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 56/69  chemical requirements (e.g. additives, reagents etc.),  waste components generated by the system (e.g. sludge, spent reagents etc.),  amounts of any by-products,  energy required to run the system,  exact sizes for all equipment,  a detailed and quantitative mass balance for a system producing drinking water for a 10-person house hold (include key components),  a scaled-up design, including water and mass balances, for a system to be implemented for a complete East Santo village community, and  the projected cost per litre of treated water (including capital cost, based on construction cost and equipment lifespan, and the maintenance and operating costs, such as chemical and power requirements). Besides the above calculation, include a process flow diagram of water and other materials, including contaminants and additives, around the whole process (i.e. mass and volume balance, including any losses. Also, include the following:  assembly and/or operational instructions (appropriate for community members of an East Santo village),  details of material selection for the various components, with particular emphasis on materials sustainability based on a life-cycle approach,  a bill of materials, and  capital and operating costs per year. Update your engineering estimations and calculations from your PIR; make sure you take any marking feedback on board. ii) Design Drawings You are required to produce relevant engineering drawings using appropriate software to demonstrate the layout and dimensions of your final design. Choose two of the following three:  orthogonal projection,  isometric projection, or  exploded diagram. You can use drawing software from http://student.eait.uq.edu.au/software/dreamspark/. iii) Sustainability Design You are required to demonstrate an understanding of the difficulties faced when working crossculturally and the importance of community engagement in all stages of the project. For your final report, you will need to address:  the difference in the way that members of the community would solve problems and how this would differ from the way Australian engineers solve problems. Consider how this would impact the approach to the project;  social and cultural benefits and impacts of your proposed solution. Make sure that you include the community's perception of the value of your proposed design; and  the methods that you would use to communicate your proposal to the community and any difficulties that you may face.LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 57/69 9.2.3 Project C The following design details should be included in your Final Report with drawings as required:  overview of design discussing the functionality of the whole system including structural system, connection details, users' needs, sustainability, material choices and mass,  complete bill of materials with pricing (in appendix),  a brief procedure of your moving mechanism, and  a description of any innovative features. The following annotated figures should be included, and should be large enough to show significant construction details:  plan view,  side view,  cross section view,  connection details,  moving mechanism, and  photograph of assembled model. 9.2.4 Project D In addition to the generic requirements, specific calculations for the following must be shown:  dimensions of the machine and each of its components,  specifications of all mechanical and electronic components,  a determination of the design of the bucket size (e.g. small and fast vs. large and slow optimisation), and  power requirements. In addition to these calculations, all necessary design illustrations, engineering drawings and wiring schematics are required, as well as your budget break down and risk assessment of the project, and for the operation of the prototype. As you are building a scale prototype model with different design features when compared to machines in industry, you are required to include a section based on scale-up considerations.LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 58/69 ENGG1100 FINAL REPORT – ASSESSMENT SHEET Team: Members Element (Weight) 0 None 1 Poor 2 Poor/ Mixed 3 Sound 4 Good 5 Excellent Engineering Communication (20%) Presentation (5%) The look and structure of the report including signposting for easy information retrieval No resemblance to professional report Not pitched correctly, and/or poorly structured, no signposting Slightly overlong or lacking in detail – structure/ signposts could be improved Professional – appropriately pitched – some errors Perfect – report succinct and professional – no mistakes Style (5%) Including grammar, spelling, and references Unreadable Almost unreadable, refs missing Many errors, poor proofing, refs incomplete Few grammatical/ spelling errors, good refs A couple of errors, reads well, refs complete Perfect – excellent proofing, reads well, refs complete Data presentation (5%) Presentation of data (significant figures, tables, figures etc.) No figs/ tables Diagrams illegible and of little use Missing important details (e.g. axes titles), no sig fig analysis Most conventions followed, some sig fig analysis, some problems with data All conventions followed, sig figs used, minor errors in presentation Perfect – diagrams/ tables enrich report, all data reported to best effect Executive summary (5%) A 1-page summary for the busy executive Missing Incomplete and of no use to busy executive Of limited use to a busy executive, poor structure, many refs to report Covers all major findings, limited need to read report for clarification Minor omissions only – busy exec could survive with just this page Excellent summary of report – busy exec fully informed with no need to read report Engineering Process (30%) Decision making (10%) Method of selecting design concept None Not justified or transparent Limited or flawed engineering decision making Major decisions justified using correct procedures Most decisions justified and transparent All decisions completely justified + sensitivity analysis Sustainability assessment (10%) Life Cycle Analysis of your full-scale design None Very limited and/ or incorrect Not all material and energy flows covered – very basic data – limited analysis of results Most flows included – some energy flows still required/ aspects unclear – proposals sound Encompasses all flows – energy flows identified correctly and proposals good Complete coverage – excellent evaluation of energy flows – improvements insightful Safety assessment (10%) Inclusion of an FMEA for the Demo Day operation of your prototype Missing Rudimentary only Partial consideration – unworkable/ patchy solutions proposed to identified risks. Basic FMEA completed. Major risks addressed – mitigations sound. Good analysis – minor omissions. Risks addressed with workable solutions. Full analysis: all relevant risks insightfully addressed and best possible mitigation measures proposed.LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 2 59/69 Element (Weight) 0 None 1 Poor 2 Poor/ Mixed 3 Sound 4 Good 5 Excellent Technical Content (50%) Project scope and prior art (10%) Outline of scope, assumptions and aims. Critical summary of literature and prior art that underpin design Missing Very little underpinning design – poor scope definition Inclusion of some prior art, scope patchy, assumptions not detailed or justified Major items of scope identified, aims clear, justified assumptions, relevant prior art Clear and justified scope, aims and assumptions. Prior art underpins design. Scope/ aims/ assumptions perfectly reflect initial brief. Prior art review comprehensive. Design details (15%) Design description, materials of construction and selection justification, specifications, critical values etc. Missing Limited specs, unworkable design Partial design – not to required level in coverage and/ or technical detail Sound design - mostly correct with good coverage of required aspects Good design – minor omissions and errors only Innovative and creative – added extras – fully workable Scale-up considerations (10%) Scale-up design description including materials of construction and recommendations for further work Missing Limited consideration – no knowledge of scale up concepts Many aspects not considered, major misconceptions, mostly impractical design Good understanding of scale up considerations, major aspects covered Scale up issues covered with exception of minor details, practical design Scale up issues fully covered, design as complete as possible, further work comprehensively covers requirements Design drawings (5%) Plan, elevation, section, isometric, as relevant Missing Limited, poorly drawn, incorrect Incomplete set, major errors, not relevant, not professional Drawings support design with adequate coverage and minimal errors Complete set with minor errors only, professional standard Complete set, highly professional, enrich design Sustainability design (10%) Environmental, social and economic – including connection to the community through knowledge of specific needs. Missing Little evidence of sustainability No community consideration Minimal coverage, major flaws in proposal, some aspects neglected. Limited connection to the community Basic coverage of all aspects, design meets minimum requirement only. Some community knowledge used. Good coverage, evidence of reworked design for sustainability. Good community consultation plan. Principles of sustainable design used to drive proposal to excellent effect. Excellent community plan.LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 60/69 9.3 Final Report Examples 9.3.1 Executive Summary: This summary will fully inform a busy executive, leaving no need for them to read the report. Example 25: Executive summary (4/5) X Do not use relative terms, just give the value or compare with something Aim Background Numbers X Use SI units h/d Details Recommendations 1 page total X Only SI units needed X Could include diagram X Do not reference the report X Outline assumptionsLJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 61/69 9.3.2 Project Scope and Prior Art: Use and combine the best parts of your PIRs incorporating any tutor feedback and updates. Detail what the original task was, the assumptions that were made, and what they aimed to do. Example 26: Project aim, scope and assumptions (5/5 for Scope) Background Aim of project Requirements Assumptions Tables to present information Numbered sections X Table number/title goes above X Reference X Use SI units (/d)LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 62/69 Example 27: Prior art - a contextual and critical summary of the literature relevant to the project (5/5) Various methods of conducting surveillance on wildlife were identified. Table 6 describes these technologies and their suitability for this project. Table 6: Existing methods of electronic surveillance and their suitability Having assessed each method, the result was that a "sensor-triggered camera trap" was found to be the most effective and feasible. The benefits of Machine Vision technology meant it too would also be incorporated in the final design. X Text too small. Table should be landscape format Followed by summary of pertinent conclusion Table is introduced in the text Table used to present data to best effect Correct in-text referencing Critical analysis ConclusionsLJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 63/69 9.3.3 Decision Making: All decisions should be completely justified, including sensitivity analysis. Example 28: Explicit justification (5/5 assuming also ay summary of results and sensitivity analysis) Example 29: Use of a decision matrix (2.5/5 with no intro or summary of findings) Clear formatting Design criteria Intro in text X More details of criteria X No table number X No intro of table in text X Why shaded? Not necessary TIP: If a scale is used it must be fully explained. (e.g. what is the difference between a rating of 3 and one of 4?) X Better explanation of scale required Number & titleLJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 64/69 9.3.4 Sustainability Assessment: Your LCA should encompass all aspects of your design. Example 30: LCA inclusion/ write up (3-4/5 without 'So what' follow up) Referencing Justification Figure is introduced X Values/flows X So what? Need summary paragraph of take away messages/ recommendations.LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 65/69 9.3.5 Safety Assessment: Your FMEA should address all relevant risks. Example 31: FMEA inclusion/ write up (4/5 with block diagram and 'so what' following paragraph) Item Failure Mode Causes (Failure Mechanism) Effects Risk Priority Rating Recommended Sev Prob Det RPN Improvement Electrical System No current Defective cord Defective plug Defective heating coil Cooking interruption (mission failure) 3 2 1 3 1 2 3 6 6 27 Periodically inspect cord and plug Use high-quality components Current flows to ground by alternate route Faulty insulation Cooking interruption Shock 3 4 1 1 3 4 Use a grounded (3-prong) plug Use outlets with groundfault circuit interrupters Safety Valve Open Closed Broken valve spring Steam could burn operator Increased cooking time 3 2 1 1 3 2 Design spring to handle the fatigue and corrosion that it will be subjected to Example 32: Block diagram for FMEA X Include all system components in the FMEA X Pressure Gage X Thermostat Concise descriptions Include local and system effects Realistic & effective solutions You will also need at least 1 paragraph highlighting and discussing the biggest risks and measures for mitigation Block diagram of the system componentsLJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 66/69 9.3.6 Design Details: Include fully workable details of the final design including appropriate drawings, system requirements, and specifications. Calculations should go in the appendices. Example 33: Design details (section beginning shown here only – 5/5 start only) Example 34: Design details (sizes – 5/5 assuming this detail seen in entire section) 8.2 Number of Solar Panels The solar panels to be used are the ASP 600 watt mono-crystalline panels with 16.9% efficiency. The daily power demand for the Bendee Downs site is approximately 239,541 watt-hours per day. Given these values, the total area of solar panels required can be found by equation [1]: ����� ����� ����� ���� = ����� ����� ����������� ����� ����� × ���������� Applying this formula gives us that the site needs a total of 236.23m2 in solar panels . . . System requirements System overview Specifications and values X Use SI units and simplify = 240 kWh/d [1] X Use significant figures e.g. 240m2 not 236.23m2LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 67/69 Example 35: Design calculations – correct use of appendix (5/5 assuming write up in report) 9.3.7 Design Drawings: A complete, highly professional set of drawings that enrich the design. Example 36: Section (5/5) Example 37: Isometric (4/5) Calculations set out in the appendices Dimensions X Use SI units X Use third person Title Block X Drawing number X Incomplete X Can be improved by adding estimated values/sizesLJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 68/69 Example 38: Layout (4-5/5) 9.3.8 Sustainability Design: Environmental, social, and economic principles should be used to drive the proposal, and assess the final design. A consultation plan should connect to the community. Example 39: Sustainability design (5/5) X Units? Table to present information Triple bottom line assessment used Rubric used to evaluate (presented in report elsewhere)LJK/17 ENGG1100 Document 69/69 Example 40: Community Consultation Plan (5/5) Table to present information. But probably doesn't need to be double-spaced. Identify potential barriers Community-specific knowledge X How do you know? Give background and reference X Table not introduced in text