EFDP1001 Engineering Foundations: Design and Processes

Unit: Engineering Foundation: Design and Processes (EFDP 1001)

Title: Design Evaluation Report

Activity: The purpose of the design evaluation report is to determine how well you understand the process
of creating a conceptual design based on the requirement specifications provided by a client,
evaluating the conceptual designs against a set of criteria and constraints, and choosing the best
one for implementation at the client’s site. Since your team must provide the best solution,
keeping in mind who the ultimate client is and not a solution for someone living in Perth, it is
important to know if you obtain the capability of evaluating a concept independently from your
teammates.

For a detailed Assessment description and specification of work to be done see briefing sheets located
on Moodle in the “Assessments: #3 - Design Evaluation Report” tab.

Assessment criteria and marking distribution and Engineers Australia competencies addressed
Value of the assessment based on the rubric provided below:
 Assessment Mark: 100 marks
 Assessment Weighting: 35%

The total assessment mark awarded is made up of the points awarded to each element assessed.
Each item of the assessment in the rubric shows the EA competencies (ENGINEERS AUSTRALIA Stage 1
competencies) to be demonstrated. ‘Level of thinking’ is specified for those elements of the assignment
when it is appropriate.

Detailed guidelines and feedback

This detailed assessment rubric sets out assessment expectations so that you will be aware of the
competencies to be developed and the expected standards. This table will also be used for assessing
your work to provide sufficient feedback on how you performed against these standards. Feedback will
be provided on rubrics attached to your TurnItIn or Moodle submission.

1|Page
 EFDP1001 Engineering Foundations: Design and Processes

Marking Rubric for Design Evaluation Report

Sections of Report Engineers Australia Competencies & Level of Learning Percentage Points
of Assessment

Organisation 8
Referencing 3.2 Communication 7
Language Levels of learning: Knowledge, Application 12

1.1 Science / Engineering fundamentals

Executive Summary 1.2 Conceptual understanding 10

3.2 Communication
Levels of Learning: Knowledge, Analysis

1.1 Science / Engineering fundamentals

Introduction 1.2 Conceptual understanding 5

3.2 Communication
Levels of Learning: Knowledge, Analysis

1.1 Science/Engineering fundamentals

1.2 Conceptual Understanding
Conceptual Design
1.5 Context 25
2.1 Problem solving
Levels of Learning: Comprehension, Analysis, Synthesis

1.1 Science/Engineering fundamentals

1.2 Conceptual Understanding
Evaluation of Conceptual Design 20
1.5 Context
2.1 Problem solving
Levels of Learning: Analysis, Evaluation

1.1 Science / Engineering fundamentals

Conclusion 1.2 Conceptual understanding 3

3.2 Communication
Levels of Learning: Knowledge, Analysis

3.1 Professionalism

Individual Reflection 3.5 Self Conduct 10

3.6 Team work
Levels of learning: Evaluation

Due Date: 23 April @ 11:55 PM

2|Page
 EFDP1001 Engineering Foundations: Design and Processes
INTRODUCTION:

It is always a mystery as to how original designs come about. Most people think that the solutions to the
hardest problems are birthed by companies in board rooms or in cubicles, where the employee sits for hours
on end pondering over the problem until the solution jumps out. And when that happens, it becomes obvious
that the solution proposed must be the next step in the company’s progression to becoming better.
However, this is not really how it works.

In most cases, great ideas that result in amazing solutions for large problems are not birthed in the office but
instead while relaxing at a coffee shop, exercising, walking around, or just talking to your friends. These ideas
are then discussed and debated, and sometimes pitched using the back of a napkin, bar coaster, or used
envelope. Then once it is out in the open, it is refined to the point where a final design can be visualized,
refined, and pitched to the client. As shown in lecture, this method of creating and pitching a conceptual
design has birthed companies such as Xerox and Southwest Airlines. It is also constantly used by CEOs of
companies, such as Richard Branson of Virgin Airlines, or in companies known for innovation such as Google,
as a means of coming up with new ideas to further the company’s potential.

It is this method that is an essential skill to the engineer. Top rated engineers are not those who are only
great in their analytic abilities, but those who are able to envision a future with solutions to today’s problems,
be creative in the solutions, and able to discuss and pitch their ideas to those who are in and not in their field.
It has been said that the most important man in the room at an engineering meeting is not the head engineer,
but rather the CFO (chief financial officer) since if he is not convinced that the project is worthwhile to invest
in, he will not release the funds for the project. And if that happens, then nothing moves forward.

In this phase of the design process, you will be given the opportunity to create a conceptual design that is a
possible solution to the problem that your group is facing, describe the conceptual design using words and
diagrams so that your project manager will be able to fully understand your conceptual design and how it
possibly solves the problem, and then evaluate the design against a design criteria to see how it matches
with what is expected from the solution.

3|Page
 EFDP1001 Engineering Foundations: Design and Processes
REPORT FORMAT

The Design Evaluation Report will be marked out of 100 marks and will be 35% of your overall percentage
marks for the unit. It will basically describe and evaluate a proposed conceptual design as a possible solution
to your group’s problem. As a result, the structure of your report should be:

 Cover
 Executive Summary
 Contents Page
 Introduction
 Conceptual Design
 Evaluation of Conceptual Deign
 Conclusion
 References
 Appendix
o Individual Reflection

Below is a description of each part.

 Cover Page
A page with:
 Project, unit and Curtin logo present,
 Author, student ID, company name and date of submission
 A relevant picture relating to this submission

 Executive summary
This section should include briefly the purpose of this report, problem being addressed, design
criteria used in the report, score obtained by the conceptual design and the main reasons why it
was given that score. The page limit is 3 pages and the word limit is 1000 words.

The marking for this section will be based on:

Executive Summary (10 marks)

 The executive summary should include the:

• Purpose of design evaluation
• Statement of the project brief
• Explains research method used, scope and limitations of the report
• Design criteria used to evaluate conceptual design, including weightings
• Score for the conceptual design
• Main reasons for the score

4|Page
 EFDP1001 Engineering Foundations: Design and Processes

 Contents page
A list of numbered sentences that summarizes the body of the project and points to page numbers.
It should strongly suggest a systematic design process has been followed.

It is suggested that you use the table of contents generated by Word. Under “Home” tab, use
“Heading 1” for each major section style (ex: 2. Human factors) , “Heading 2” for a first sub-level
section style (ex: 2.1 Men in Sadhikhola, Nepal), “Heading 3” for a second sub-level section (ex: 2.1.2
Men who live in the Southeast corner of Sadhikhola, Nepal), etc. When you are done, generate the
table using “Table of Contents” “Contents” (first option) under “Reference” tab. This will remove
problems with aligning page numbers, which some people have.

In addition, a table of figures must be included if graphics are used in the report. This table
is included as part of the mark associated with the contents page.

The marks that are attached to the formatting of the contents page fall under “Consistent and
logical formatting of contents page, body and graphics” in the marking criteria; this is worth 5
marks.

 Introduction
This section should briefly explain the problem statement and key stakeholders associated with the
project.

The marking for this section will be based on:

Quality of Introduction (5 marks)

 Details the report objectives and outlines the problem to be addressed

 Explains research method used, scope and limitations of the report
 Outlines the structure of the report

1. Conceptual Design
This section will outline the conceptual design that you have chosen to evaluate. The conceptual
design should have come from your team meeting brainstorming session during your project
meeting. This section is where you fully explain the conceptual design using text accompanied with
relevant graphics to illustrate the concept. Each graphic must be accompanied with text to explain
the graphic. The concept must be explained thoroughly enough so that the reader understands how
the conceptual design works, how it solves the problem you are addressing, and any improvements
or innovations in the design. When structuring this section, be sure you provide answers to the
following:

5|Page
 EFDP1001 Engineering Foundations: Design and Processes
o Explanation of the theory behind the conceptual design. This may include answering
questions such as: (1) why does the conceptual design work? and (2) Are there equations
that govern a process used in the conceptual design? If it has been used and proven to work
in another location, it is advantageous to cite that in this subsection.
o What improvements have you made to the design (if it was implemented in another location)
to meet the design criteria or how did you adapt the theory to meet the design criteria.
o Explain the refined conceptual design and how it works. If there are multiple parts, you might
want to explain how each part works.

The marking for this section will be based on:

Section 1: Conceptual Designs (25 marks)
 1 quality conceptual design is clearly identified and described.
Description must include:
o Theory behind the conceptual design
o Improvements made to an existing product on the market to
meet the design criteria or how the theory was adapted to
meet the design criteria
o Explanation of refined conceptual design and how it works.
 Engineering graphics to illustrate the concept that:
o Effectively present relevant information. Overall dimensions of
concept must be included.
 Every argument must be supported by at least 2 credible references

A rough draft of Section 1 will be due in Week 6 in the project meetings

2. Evaluation of Conceptual Design

This section will utilise a method of rating each criteria in the design criteria. The design criteria is
based on the requirement specifications (criteria and constraints stated in the Stakeholders Report)
with a weighting scheme to show the importance of each of the requirements. There should be no
more than 6 main design criterions. The weighting for each part of the design criteria should be
agreed upon by the entire group and used to evaluate each conceptual design considered by the
group members. The description provided to describe each design criterion may be referenced from
the Stakeholders Report, and thus, can be the same for each member in the group, if properly
referenced. The justification for the weights for each criterion, although may be similar for each
member of the group with the same references, must be paraphrased by each student.

The conceptual design must be evaluated to see how well it meets the design criteria. The conceptual
design will need to be scored, typically on a scale from 0 to 10, for each design criterion given.
Accompanying the score for each criterion must be an explanation of why a particular value was
given with evidence to support the explanation. An overall weighted score, which incorporates the
individual scores with the weighting for each design criterion, is to be given to signify the overall
rating of the conceptual design. Since sustainability and safety are major concerns with projects in
this unit, both sustainability and safety concerns must be addressed in this section for the proposed

6|Page
EFDP1001 Engineering Foundations: Design and Processes
conceptual design. Sustainability concerns include areas such as economic, cultural, and
environmental. Explanation of the weighting scheme will be given during the lecture.

An example of an explanation and justification of a design criterion with its weighting, and an
evaluation of the conceptual design according to the design criterion (ex: sub-criterion of Ease of
Operation relating to needed farming tools) may look like the following:

3.1 Ease of Operation – Weighting 5%

3.1.1 Design Criteria

Ease of operation is part of the operational criteria, and is characterized ideally by the
following traits: (1) the equipment must be able to operate manually with no electricity or
power can be used for the design; (2) the design must be simple and straightforward to
ensure that it is a skill that can be taught to younger generations. This includes ensuring
that it does not take any extreme effort or strength for the farmers to be able to operate,
given that most are women; (3) the design should be relatively lightweight and hence easy
to carry, transport and be put away for storage; and (4) the equipment should be able to
withstand and operate under harsh conditions including extreme humidity and heat, so it
can be used throughout the year for any season, should the equipment be required (Lee et
al 2016)

3.1.2 Justification of Weighting

Ease of Operation is a small factor to consider in the design, and therefore is given a
weighting of 5%. The tool will be a lot more beneficial and effective if the design is not too
technical, and has a simple but effective function. Although women are the primary
farmers at the camp (Oppong and Gritzner 2008), child labour is still used (UNHCR 2002).
As a result, a design that is easy to operate and only requires one action or motion, will be
easier to integrate into the current ways of farming.

3.1.3 Justification of Score

The operation of the device is particularly simple, as it only requires a pushing motion. As
previously mentioned, the push-plough is lightweight and has wheels. The ease of
operation in the design was also considered when choosing the angle of inclination of the
handles, as stated in Section 2.4 - Handles. This allows for it to be pushed more easily
across the soil. Therefore, it is suitable for both women and children to use. The non-
adjustable height of the plough can cause problems, as it is fixed at 0.9m above the ground
(Figure 2). As explained in Section 2.2 – Structure and Dimensions, the height was chosen
based on the average height of Zambian women. Despite this, shorter children may have
difficulty applying enough force into the handle. In addition, it is not known whether the
180° rotation explained in Section 2.4 - Handles, will work seamlessly with the fixed,
parallel wheel system. Although it was tested with a small model, the real materials,
friction and weight, make it difficult to determine if the pivoting action will be successful.
Therefore, despite the high ease of operation, marks were deducted for the possible
difficulties, resulting in a score of 6/10.

An example of the table summarizing the scores from the evaluation of a conceptual design (ex:
New methods of road construction) may look like the following:

7|Page
 EFDP1001 Engineering Foundations: Design and Processes

Table 1: Summary of Scores from an Evaluation of a Conceptual Design

The marking for this section will be based on:

Section 2: Evaluation of Conceptual Designs (20 marks)

 All Design Criteria listed in detail with weighting

 Weighting of each criterion is justified. Evidence must be provided.
 Evaluation addresses all elements of all criteria & supports the score.
Evidence must be provided
 Evaluation of Conceptual Design is summarised in a table

 Important: Ensure this section demonstrates an understanding of

sustainability (economic, cultural, environmental) and safety
 Every argument must be supported by credible references

A rough draft of this section will be due in Week 7 in the project meetings

 Conclusion and Recommendations

This section should briefly summarize the main ideas and findings of your report.

The marking for this section will be based on:

Quality of conclusion (3 marks)
 States main findings for each of the issues analysed in the report
 Makes at least one recommendation that flows from the main findings
of the report
8|Page
 EFDP1001 Engineering Foundations: Design and Processes

 References

This report is to be referenced as per APA 6th edition and only to credible and relevant sources.
Every end-text reference must have a matching in-text reference.

 Appendices
If there is anything that your group feels that can support your report, but it is not crucial enough to
be in the main body of the report, then place it into the appendices. If the information is important
enough that the reader must read it to understand your report, then it belongs in the main body of
the report. The appendices are used to hold supporting evidence for your report. If you need the
reader to read it, then you must refer to it in the main body of the report ie “See Appendix 1” An
example of what may be placed into your appendix include: Force calculations, torque calculations,
cost calculations, weight calculations and individual reflection.

The Individual Reflection is a key part of the report, which is found in the appendix. The individual
reflection must contain the following pieces of information:

 Identification of ONE lesson learnt from the EWB project, and ONE lesson learnt about
teamwork
 Explanation of how each of the above lessons was learnt and how this would help the
stakeholders benefit from your project

The marking for this section will be based on:

Individual Reflection (10 marks)

 Identification of ONE lesson learnt from the EWB project, and ONE
lesson learnt about teamwork
 Explanation of how each of the above lessons was learnt and how this
would help the stakeholders benefit from your project

Other Notes on Report Formatting

The remaining marks for your report will be allocated to the following items:
• Title page and consistent and logical formatting of contents page, body and graphics (8 marks)
 Referenced as per APA 6th edition and only to credible and relevant sources (7 marks)
• Language (12 marks)
• Grammar and sentence structure
• Proof reading (e.g., spelling, punctuation, and page numbers checked)

The maximum size for the body of the report should be less than 5,000 words. Further, please note a
maximum is not a target; it is a limit. There is a penalty of 10 points for every 100 words that is above the
word limit. Thus, if your word count is from 5,001 to 5,100, then there is 10 points deducted; 5101 to 5,200
is 20 points deducted; and so on. The word count only includes from the introduction to the conclusion; it
does not include the contents page, executive summary, references, or appendices.

9|Page
 EFDP1001 Engineering Foundations: Design and Processes
The font choice is up to you, however, recommended fonts are those such as Arial, Calibri, Times New Roman,
where the font is clear and easy to read. Consult your project managers if you have problems deciding. Font
size should be no smaller than 10. Spacing is 1 ½ lines. Rule of thumb is that if the project managers can’t
read the report, it is marked wrong. Also take note that all submissions will be in Microsoft word format.
Since uploading a word document may not keep the desired format of your document, be sure that when
uploading, the uploaded document is formatted in the same way that you expect it to be.

If you place a table, graphic, figure, picture, or photo in the report without any reference to it and explanation
of it in the body of the report, then it will be ignored. All tables, graphics, figures, pictures and photos must
be properly documented and labelled. In addition, there has to be something in the body of the report that
details the nature of the item, and tells the reader that the item should be looked at. Software packages,
such as Sketch Up, Autocad, or Solidworks, can be used to create graphics that best show and demonstrate
your concept for this report.

Submission Process
Your work will be submitted electronically as a PDF file on Moodle. You will find a link labelled “Submission
Link: Design Evaluation Report”. Turnitin is a tool that is used to check for the possibility of plagiarism for
any submitted student work. When you submit your work to Turnitin, you will receive an originality report
with a percentage. Turnitin will compare your work to its huge database of work across international
campuses, across publicly available documents on the internet, and against documents submitted by
previous students in this unit and will return to you a percentage. The higher the percentage, the more likely
that your work was not paraphrased or referenced correctly, and thus the higher the chance that your work
is plagiarized. A percentage of 20% or higher will cause people to take notice. As a result, you will need to
be cautious of what you submit. It is advised that you submit your work through the practice Turnitin
submission link to know what your score is prior to an official submission. The practice link will allow you the
option to rephrase the parts of your report that are highlighted prior to an official submission. At Curtin,
plagiarism is taken seriously, and the consequences can be as harsh as removal from the university.

10 | P a g e
 DESIGN EVALUATION REPORT MARKING CRITERIA
Organisation (8 marks)
 Title page:
o Project, unit and Curtin College logo present,
o Author, student ID, company name and date of submission
o A relevant picture relating to this submission
 Consistent and logical formatting of contents page, body and graphics
Referencing (7 marks)
 Referenced as per APA 6th edition and only to credible and relevant sources.

Language (12 marks)

 Grammar and sentence structure
 Proof reading (e.g., spelling, punctuation, page numbers checked)

Executive Summary (10 marks)

 The executive summary, which is provided before the contents page, should include the:
o Purpose of design evaluation
o Statement of the project brief
o Explains research method used, scope and limitations of the report
o Design criteria used to evaluate conceptual design, including weightings
o Score for the conceptual design
o Main reasons for the score
Introduction (5 marks)
• Details the report objectives and outlines the problem to be addressed
• Explains research method used, scope and limitations of the report
• Outlines the structure of the report
Section 1: Conceptual Design (25 marks)
 1 quality conceptual design is clearly identified and described. Description must include:
o Theory behind the conceptual design
o Improvements made to an existing product on the market to meet the design criteria or how the
theory was adapted to meet the design criteria
o Explanation of refined conceptual design and how it works.
 Engineering graphics to illustrate the concept that:
o Effectively present relevant information. Overall dimensions of concept must be included.
 Every argument must be supported by at least 2 credible references
Section 2: Evaluation of Conceptual Design (20 marks)
 All Design Criteria listed in detail with weighting.
 Weighting of each criterion is justified. Evidence must be provided
 Evaluation addresses all elements of all criteria & supports the score. Evidence must be provided
 Evaluation of Conceptual Design is summarised in a table
 Important: Ensure this section demonstrates an understanding of sustainability concerns including
economic, cultural, environmental and safety
 Every argument must be supported by credible references
Conclusion and Recommendations (3 marks)
 States main findings for each of the issues analysed in the report
 Makes at least one recommendation that flows from the main findings of the report
Individual Reflection - (10 marks) ( Include in Appendix)
 Identification of ONE lesson learnt from the EWB project, and ONE lesson learnt about teamwork
 Explanation of how each of the above lessons was learnt and how this would help the stakeholders benefit
from your project
Assessment Weighting 35% Total Mark /100