Martin Lander 14 Resit Project – Globally Conscious Engineer .docx

Martin Lander 14 Resit Project – Globally Conscious Engineer
PROJECT
Using the design tools available to you plan your project using a
design model (eg Pahl
and Beitz, MAE) to fully investigate the brief and develop a
solution to the problem. This is
to help develop your Global Awareness in Engineering and to
help defining the problem.
LEARNING OUTCOMES AS SESSED
1. Investigate and define a problem and identify constraints
including environmental and
sustainability limitations, health and safety and risk assessment
issues [IMechE_D1].
2. Understand customer and user needs and the importance of
considerations such as
aesthetics [D2], and cost drivers [D3].
3. Use creativity to establish innovative solutions [D4] and
consider stages of the design
process and organise ideas to evaluate outcomes [D6].
4. Ensure fitness for purpose for all aspects of the problem
including production, operation,
maintenance and disposal [D5].
5. Apply appropriate codes of practice and industry standards
[P6].

BRIEF
Globally conscious engineering
Produce plans for an innovative irrigation system that will bring
water
from a nearby pond or river to water your vegetable garden
(Horenstein 2010: 84). It must operable by an 8 year old and
allow
villagers that cannot access a clean water supply the opportunity
to
water their crops. It should give a flow of 0.1l per minute per
sq.
metre of crops that are being grown. It must have the option to
switch
it off should the crops begin to become saturated. It must be
protected as much as
possible from vandalism.
the form of solar
panels as they are a target for thieves. Plastic parts are also
preferred for this
reason as steel has a high resale value.
components that may be
available locally.
ly repairable
parts.

103MAE - Design
Martin Lander – [email protected]
Project Title Resit CW2 - Group Project – Globally Conscious
Engineer
Project
Submission
Details
- THIS IS TO BE SUBMITTED ONLINE THROUGH MOODLE
in PDF.
- 30/06/14 (2355).
- 50% of Module Mark
- late submissions will receive a mark of 0%.
“I DON’T SEE THE POI NT SIR.”
Fundamental engineering science underpins this project.
Consider your engineering
science in regards to beam bending and shear stress diagrams
and calculations to
consider if certain materials will withstand a certain load.
Think of the items you’ve been
drawing for your portfolio. Also calculate forces involved in
the system so you know if any
of the equipment you’ve considered in your concept will fail.
You should research similar systems that work in the same way,
and if you think there’s
nothing in the world that will do the job, think again. The
IPhone did not exist at some
point, but that is nothing more than a new combination of old

ideas. Microchips have been
around since we put a man on the moon. Google will not
provide you with an answer.
You must show evidence and use Pugh to show you have
developed your chosen concept
(a concept is not a final design) provide detail to produce a
viable solution. You should
define exactly which mechanical components and fastenings
will be used (recommended).
You should structure your project correctly using the MAE
Report Writing Guide on
Moodle. You should plan the project using the MAE Design
Model, also on Moodle.
Follow the L1 sections to help guide you through the process.
Marks will be lost for not
using the model. The submission requirements are laid out
below and which section of the
MAE Design Model they fit into.
Watch this video for more details on Plan Timor Leste.
Actually, it’s unrelated but this
exceptional young lad made this from scrap look what he can
do!!
REFERENCES
Horenstein, M. N. (2010) Design Concepts for Engineers. 3
rd
edn. London: Prentice

RULES AND REGULATION S
- All drawings are to be drawn on A3, you will need to find
university facilities that
allow you to scan this size into your document. Use Adobe
Acrobat to collate them.
- All drawings to use BS8888 technical drawing standard.
As part of the final drawing package, as a minimum I would
expect to see;
One isometric assembly drawing (with annotations).
One orthographic assembly drawing (with annotations of
finishes, movements assembly
dimensions etc).
All concept drawings should be in isometric. You can use CAD
if you wish, however you
must allow yourself the time to model the product as well, so it
won’t necessarily be easier
or quicker to use CAD. You are not constrained to using
CATIA, you may use any CAD
package you’re comfortable with, Google Sketchup or Autodesk
Inventor ar e
recommended.
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=test+rigs&hl=en&source=ln
ms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=J003UejIIo2rOt7MgeAN&ved=0CAoQ
_AUoAQ&biw=1920&bih=949#hl=en&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=reco
mmended&oq=recommended&gs_l=img.3..0l10.204210.205768.
0.205835.11.8.0.3.3.0.107.404.7j1.8.0...0.0...1c.1.5.img.vnS7Ei
syPHg&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_cp.r_qf.&bvm=bv.43287494,d.
ZWU&fp=13235560a4e0e3b3&biw=1920&bih=949
http://cuba.coventry.ac.uk/maedesign/how-to-use-this-guide/
http://makerfaireafrica.com/2012/11/05/a-15-yo-nigerian-boys-
hydraulic-toys/

TO ACHIEVE HIGH ER MARKS ON THE DRAW ING
SECTION
drawing ( ie, not just one for
the sake of trying to obtain more marks, it has to be there for a
reason).
and thoughtfully (find examples in
library to learn from).
WHAT YOU SHOULD SUBM IT
Submission (Online submission)
1000 word report minimum (wordcount excl. references,
figures and charts)
Design
Model Stage
(The areas highlighted in the Rubric would be an excellent way
of structuring
your report into sub-chapters within the overall structure of the
report.
contributing technology.

tions of forces involved eg.
using FBDs
n to manufacturable
quality and BS8888.
(Google Sketchup may be used).
ease of
functionality ~300 words.
RFamily Name:«Surname» Email:. SID:.«ID_number»
%
0
-4
0

4
1
-5
0
5
1
-6
0
6
1
-7
0
7
0
+
S
e
c
ti
o
n

M
a
rk
%
General Note:
If you have received a zero for
any of your grades, it is
because there was no work
received that matched that
given criteria.
Q
u
a
li
ty
o
f
w
ri
tt
e
n
E
n

g
li
s
h
,
in
c
lu
d
in
g
g
ra
m
m
a
r,
s
p
e
ll
in
g
a

n
d
s
y
n
ta
x
.
B
re
v
it
y
,
c
la
ri
ty
a
n
d
s
tr
u
c

tu
re
.
10 Poorly structured report with
many details poorly presented
and little attention to detail
making for uneasy reading. No
evidence of having used the
MAE Report Writing Guideline.
Satisfactory structure and
presentation. Limited use the
MAE Report Writing Guideline
and poorly presented. Some
details could be improved.
Good structure and
presentation. Awareness of
having used the MAE Report
Writing Guideline and
adequate presentation format.
Some errors in flow of
narrative.
Very good attention to detail
and structure of report, well
presented. Good use of MAE
Report Writing Guidelines with
moderately logical flow of
narrative, and structured as
per the MAE design model.
Outstanding attention to detail
and structure, very clearly

presented. Excellent use of
MAE Report Writing Guidelines
with logical flow of narrative,
and structured as per the MAE
design model. An outstandingly
professional presentation.
«M
1»
R
e
fe
re
n
c
in
g
a
p
p
ro
p
ri
a
te
i
n

s
ty
le
.
5 Little evidence of wider reading
with no in-text citations. List of
References shows little
evidence of research with very
few sources being used.
References are not to CU
Harvard style.
Little evidence of wider reading
with little or no statements
supported by in-text citations.
List of References is limited
with a few sources being used.
References in CU Harvard style.
Moderate evidence of wider
reading with few statements
List of References shows
evidence of research with a
few sources being used (less
than ten). References in CU
Harvard style, some image left
unreferenced.
Very good evidence of wider
reading with many statements

evidence of research using a
variety of sources (more than
ten). All references (including
images) in CU Harvard style.
Outstanding evidence of wider
reading with all statements
evidence of thorough research
using a large variety of sources
(more than ten). All references
(including images) in CU
Harvard style.
«M
2»
G
a
n
tt
C
h
a
rt
.
10 Poor level of detail and limited
understanding of the function
of a Gantt chart.

Limited level of detail and
limited understanding of the
function of a Gantt chart.
An good level of detail
understanding of the function
of a Gantt chart. Presented
neatly using appropriate
software with all upcoming
deadlines included to help
balance time effectively.
An good level of detail and
clear understanding of the
function of a Gantt chart.
Presented neatly using
appropriate software with all
upcoming deadlines included
to help balance time
effectively.
An outstanding level of detail
with task logically broken
down. Presented very neatly
using appropriate software
with all upcoming deadlines
included to help balance time
effectively.
«M
3»

E
x
a
m
p
le
s
o
f
s
im
il
a
r
d
e
v
ic
e
s
.
10 Little or no review of existing
similar devices. Poorly
presented. Little or no
evidence of comparison of
existing devices and project
aim.

Limited review of existing
similar devices. Data poorly
presented. Little evidence of
comparison of existing devices
and project aim.
Limited review of existing
similar devices. Indication of
data collection and comparison
such that information can be
used later.
Review of existing similar
devices. Indication of
structured data collection
presented suitably such that
information can be used later.
Thorough review of existing
similar devices. Clear method
of data collection presented
suitably such that information
can be used later.
«M
4»
C
o

n
s
tr
a
in
ts
a
n
d
C
ri
te
ri
a
.
5 Little or no list of unfounded
‘must haves’ and ‘could haves’.
Small list of ‘must haves’ and
‘could haves’, respectively.
Little connection to evidence
gained from FBDs and Market
Review.
Limited list of ‘must haves’ and
‘could haves’, respectively.
Vague links back to evidence

gained from FBDs and Market
Review.
Well considered list of ‘must
haves’ and ‘could haves’,
respectively. Clear links back
to evidence gained from FBDs
and Market Review.
Comprehensive list of ‘must
haves’ and ‘could haves’,
respectively. Clear links back
to evidence gained from FBDs
and Market Review and
organised into a QFD which
clearly shows measureable
Target Values.
«M
6»
T
h
re
e
C
o
n
c
e
p

ts
.
15 Little or poor presentation of
ideas. Difficult to understand
and not understandable and
clear. Student has taken a
poor photo with an Ephone
and inserted it into document.
Poorly presented
considerations of ideas. Drawn
in appropriate style,
understandable and clear.
Images scanned and inserted
into documents at a suitable
contrast level, not squashed or
skewed.
Less than three well-drawn,
annotated, realistic
considerations of ideas.
Details drawn from data
collected in previous stages.
Drawn in appropriate style,
skewed.
Three unique, well-drawn,
annotated, realistic
considerations of ideas.
Details drawn from data

Largely drawn in isometric or
appropriate style, but evidence
of laziness in not attempting;
skewed. Some images
photographed.
Three unique, extrememly
well-drawn, annotated,
realistic considerations of ideas
to an excellent level. Details
drawn from data collected in
previous stages. All drawn in
isometric or appropriate style,
skewed. Student has not taken
a poor photo with an Ephone
and inserted it into document.
«M
7»
P
u
g
h
M

a
tr
ix
(C
o
n
c
e
p
t
g
e
n
e
ra
ti
o
n
i
n
l
in
e

w
it
h
M
A
E
D
e
s
ig
n
m
o
d
e
l)
.
10 Pugh's Matrix has not been
applied.
Pugh's Matrix has been applied
but inappropriately with a little
criteria taken from previous
research.

appropriately with a little
research. Results have not
been fabricated to support
previous arguments.
appropriately with a few
research. Results have not
been fabricated to support
previous arguments.
Pugh's Matrix has been
applied appropriately with a
large number of criteria taken
from previous research.
Results have not been
fabricated to support previous
arguments.
«M
8»
S
e
le
c
te

d
c
o
n
c
e
p
t,
j
u
s
ti
fi
c
a
ti
o
n
a
n
d
d
e
v
e
lo

p
m
e
n
t.
15 Very poor presentation made
with little or no evidence of
links back to the data collected
in previous stages. Little
evidence of concept
development to final design.
Poor presentation made with
little evidence of links back to
the data collected in previous
stages. Little evidence of
concept development to final
design. Logical conclusions
drawn but concept shows little
development to a
manufactureable stage.
Good presentation made with
links back to the data collected
in previous stages.
Justification supported by
design to help support the
description. Logical
conclusions drawn but concept
shows little development to a

manufactureable stage.
Very good presentation of
chosen concept, made with
clear links back to the data
Justification offered against
original criteria, supporting
statements offered. Good
design stage, showing clear
improvement and
consideration of the process;
text appropriately interspersed
with appropriately presented
images to help support the
conclusions drawn and concept
developed but missing vital
manufacturing detail.
Excellent presentation of
chosen concept, made with
clear links back to the data
Evaluations within justification
against original criteria,
supporting statements offered.
Excellent concept development
to final design stage, showing
clear improvement and
consideration of the process;
text appropriately interspersed
with appropriately presented
images to help support the

conclusions drawn and concept
developed to a
manufactureable stage
considering component parts,
OEM item and Limits and Fits
specified.
«M
9»
D
ra
w
in
g
P
a
c
k
a
g
e
(B
S
8
8

8
8
).
(S
e
e
A
p
p
e
n
d
ix
A
f
o
r
fu
ll
d
e
ta
il

s
).
15 Very poorly presentation.
Little evidence of drawing in
line with appropriate number
of views to BS8888 standard.
Poor presentation. Little
evidence of drawing in line
with appropriate number of
views to BS8888 standard.
Good presentation, scanned,
rotated, in A3 and adjusted the
contrast. Little evidence of
drawing in line with
appropriate number of views
to BS8888 standard.
Good presentation, scanned,
rotated, in A3 and adjusted the
contrast. All drawn with
appropriate number of views
to BS8888 standard.
Appropriate number of
drawings as per Appendix A.
Excellent presentation,
scanned, rotated, in A3 and
adjusted the contrast. All
drawn with appropriate
number of views to BS8888
standard. Appropriate number

of drawings as per Appendix A.
«M
11
»
D
is
c
u
s
s
io
n
o
f
fi
n
a
l
d
e
s
ig
n
in

c
lu
d
in
g
a
e
s
th
e
ti
c
s
,
m
a
te
ri
a
ls
a
n
d
e
a
s

e
o
f
fu
n
c
ti
o
n
a
li
ty
.
5 Little or no discussion
presented poorly. Does not
highlights problems
encountered based on data
collected at previous stages.
Includes reflection and
discussion. Highlights
problems encountered based
on data collected at previous
stages.
Approx. 0.5 pages, including
images and reflection and
problems encountered and

draws conclusions based on
data collected at previous
stages.
Approx. 0.5 pages, including
images and appropriate
reflection and discussion.
Highlights problems
encountered and draws logical
conclusions based on data
collected at previous stages.
Approx. 0.5-1 page (s),
including images where
necessary showing mature and
appropriate reflection and
problems encountered and
draws logical conclusions
based on data collected at
previous stages.
«M
13
»
100 Overall Mark for CW2 –
Global Engineer.
«CW2»

Martin Lander 14 Resit Project – Globally Conscious Engineer .docx

Martin Lander 14 Resit Project – Globally Conscious Engineer .docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Martin Lander 14 Resit Project – Globally Conscious Engineer .docx

Similar to Martin Lander 14 Resit Project – Globally Conscious Engineer .docx (20)

More from infantsuk

More from infantsuk (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Martin Lander 14 Resit Project – Globally Conscious Engineer .docx