Engineering – You’re Hired!

Year 2 Project Week

Engineering You’re Hired
Submission and Assessment
For the Engineering You’re Hired week, as a group you are required to produce a proposed design in response to your brief, and a plan for a project to take that design to the “proof of concept stage” This will be assessed in two ways: Assessment Requirement 1 A written proposal Proportion of the assessment 70% 30% Deadline 08:00 Friday 7th February 2014 13:00 Friday 7th February 2014

2 A group presentation/pitch for the funding of your proposal

The detailed breakdown of the assessment is shown in the assessment grid below with the word/figure limit for each section of the written proposal also given.

Some technical detail about the written submission
Each group will be required to submit the written proposal in MOLE, using the template that can be downloaded from the MOLE site. Please take the template and add your text and images into the boxes provided. The text should be in Arial format, with a font size of 11. Please note the following requirements for this document: ● One file only can be submitted. Any figures/diagrams/photos need to be embedded within this one file. ● The file format should be either MS Word (.doc or .docx) or Portable Document Format (.pdf). ● The file size must be < 20MB. Please note that if you have images in your document, then these could be large files and you may need to reduce the file size of the images prior to embedding them if you find your overall document is too large. The following resources may help. “Understanding images”: a guide to file size and resolution: A utility (downloadable) for reducing file size is available here:

customers and society at large) and what is the route for commercialisation3 of your proposal and what are the competing technologies4. . Feasibility of design is discussed with some use of supporting calculations. Impact & Commercial Implications [max 200 words] This section should state what your proposal aims1 to develop. The depth of thought behind design selection is very clear. Very Good/2i There are a number of very good aims included and a clear discussion of how this will impact the company. Competing technologies are identified but not discussed. Further development is clear and applicable with obvious thought having gone into it. Absent Only use if section is blank. A full justification of the design is not provided. Figures are inappropriate. Demonstrate where possible that your idea is feasible3 with outline calculations. A route for commercialisation is practical and well thought. Key calculations have been identified and included. A clear specification with some justification of choices is given. The idea of commercialisation is identified but only a brief plan is included. Exceptional figures are used to help follow the design process and support the chosen idea. customers and society. Areas for further development are identified but scope is limited. The feasibility has a justified argument is presented with very good and relevant calculations and figures. + 5 figs3] Describe the outline ideas that you generated and your reasons for selecting your proposal. A clear design pathway is presented. Obvious limitations of the design are discussed however more detail could be provided. The specifications are listed and some key elements discussed. An excellent and clear description of the design. The feasibility is supported with appropriate calculations and figures however all areas are not included in depth. A detailed discussion of how competing technologies will be utilised (or how they relate to the design) is included. Only use if section is blank. Design development1 Indicate any design aspects that will require further development. Good/2ii The aims are clearly stated with the impact on those involved discussed. Partial integration of disciplines is obvious however seems disjointed. The design does not obviously integrate the different disciplines and how the choices have been made. A thoroughly and interesting argument is presented to demonstrate the feasibility of the design. The stakeholder impact is discussed in depth and the commercialisation route is to a professional standard. A brief outline of a few ideas has been presented and there has been an attempt to provide justification for the chosen design. ● Design is presented but there is little or no attempt to demonstrate feasibility. An excellent description of alternative ideas plus a clear reasoning for being discounted. A well-reasoned argument for the chosen design is given. impact and key stakeholders mentioned but not discussed. Use of (or comparison with) competing technologies has been discussed however full impact may not be realised. A number of limitations as well as health and safety issues are discussed in depth. There is no mention of commercialisation or competing technologies. The relationship to competing technologies is clearly stated plus a discussion of the impact this has on the design. Such aspects as material choices and some limitations are identified in brief. Further developments of the idea are only briefly touched upon but without significant detail. There is a lack of clarity and only limited detail. The limitations are not addressed and issues such as materials and health and safety are not mentioned. All diagrams are to a professional standard and well integrated into the proposal. The chosen design is well justified with supporting diagrams. 2 Outline description1 of ideas considered Only use if and justification2 of the proposal [max 200 words section is blank. Little attempt at suggestions for areas of improvement. Inadequate Aims are not explicitly stated and have to be interpreted by the reader. Description of ideas is incoherent and difficult to follow. Commercialisation pathway in place.g. This should form the basis of your project management plan. A good description of multiple ideas has been presented along with a coherent justification for the chosen proposal. You should also indicate how the design choices of different disciplines have been integrated5. 3 figs] ● The chosen design [max 800 words + 12 Detailed design: Provide design specifications1justifying2 the choices you have made. There is little to no mention of the stakeholders involved or the wider impact of the proposal. the company. Satisfactory/3rd Aims. limitation4 of the design. There are clear links between the design choices and the specifications as well as a comprehensive integration of the different disciplines. Very limited number of other ideas mentioned and no justification has been given to the choice. A succinct description of the chosen design is provided. Excellent/1st There is an excellent understanding of the proposal clearly demonstrated in encompassing aims.Assessment grid for the written proposal [70% in total] Technical Design [60%] General description 1 Aim. There is a superb use of the different disciplines skills as well as a thorough understanding of the design limitations with solutions identified as areas for further development. Separation of internal/external benefits may not be clear. The specification is both detailed and concise. A clear attempt at the integration of the different disciplines ideas has been made. This could include materials selection. health and safety issues. the impact this will have on key stakeholders2 (e.

Some areas identified and limited detail given but there is no reasoned information on mitigation. Commercially sensitive and patentable technology is clearly identified and reasoned. principal activities and required resources is included. A thorough understanding of areas that may require protection and a detailed explanation behind the choice.Project management [40%] 4 Project planning and cost [max of 100 words + 1 fig] Indicate the planned duration1 of your project. Well thought out areas of failure and their relevance identified. A very concise Gantt chart is included with suitable timings. 7 Additional Information [max of 100 words] Please use this section for any other information that supports your proposal. Very clear and reasoned identification of risks. Only one of the three categories is mentioned. A realistic duration is included with reasoning behind it. Problems throughout the plan addressed with various methods of mitigation. Identification of protected technologies and the possibility of licensing. There has been no attempt to provide cost estimates and there is only a brief time plan set out. principle activity and required resources are all mentioned however little effort has been put in to justify them. The resources are given in a very brief overview without much thought. A straightforward cost estimate has been included and the Gantt chart is sensible. timescale etc. A comprehensive discussion of the duration. and show whether your proposals rely on already protected technology2.) and how you will mitigate2 these risks. Total [max 1600 words + 18 figs] . No clear identification of a commercialisation route or if the use of already protected technology will be required. Protected technology is ignored or has assumed use. A number of areas of failure are identified with some discussion on how these may be mitigated. the principal activities2 and resources3 (people. Only use if section is blank. equipment and materials) required for the design and development of your proposal up to prototype. Appropriate and creative methods of how these problems can be mitigated. A brief mention of the commercially sensitive areas however there is little justification behind it. The duration. 5 Project risk management [max of 100 words] Identify what could go wrong1 with the PLAN of your project (commercially. Little to no reference to patents. There is some discussion on areas that may require protection and the reasoning behind it. technically. All areas are identified with at least one discussed in some depth. The Gantt chart is to a professional standard and clear thought has been put in to estimating personnel costs. A very general or vague mention of what could go wrong but no attempt to address these issues. Include an estimate of the costs4 of the personnel and a Gantt chart5 showing the principal activities. Some clear thought has been put into the required resources with suitable justification. The major costs have been estimated and a very general Gantt chart is included. 6 Patent Implications [max of 100 words] Only use if section is blank. Only use if section is blank. Identify any areas of your proposal that you feel may be commercially sensitive1 or may require protection. A detailed yet not comprehensive resource selection has been made with a very good attempt at estimating costs of a number of areas. An excellent integration of protected technologies and the implications this may have. A detailed analysis of the requirements is included for both design and development of the plan. A thorough understanding of how protected technology will be utilised and the implications.

Highly novel project and enthusiastic and capable project team with excellent prospect for generating a profit. well justified with quantified demonstration of feasibility. Limited or largely incorrect information given. No pitch. Feasible project. with a clear and reasonable justification / demonstration of feasibility. risks and mitigation. likely to be effective. likely to be effective in an efficient and robust way. justification) with some errors. Good design. Information presented clearly. time keeping. Responses showing some degree of understanding. competitiveness and market need. Presentation generally understandable. involvement of multiple group members] Would you fund it? (double marks) [Examples: novelty of ideas. timeline. Novel project with convincing chances of being successful and profitable. Correct and knowledgeable responses spread across team. Response to questions [knowledgeable. Acceptable project. Responses show good understanding of multiple areas of the project. clearly presenting the project. easy to follow and understand. highly likely to meet the need. likely to meet the need. Excellent project plan. Elements of project planning present (cost. Major barriers to this being a reasonable project. with some limited potential for a return on the investment. Reasonable technical design presented with potential to meet the need and some justification. covering main areas. No responses. Highly engaging presentation. Presentation quality [engagement. Technical Design Not addressed in pitch. close to required time.Assessment grid for the presentation [30%] General description Absent Inadequate Satisfactory/3rd Good/2ii Very Good/2i Excellent/1st Project Management Not addressed in pitch. Excellent design. audibility. Elements of technical design present (specifications. Largely correct responses. but may not keep to time or be poorly organised. thoroughness. Good project plan across all areas. Uses allowed time without overrunning. No pitch. etc. but lacking factor that would make it fundable. drawings. clarity of any visual aids] Difficult to get information from presentation.) with some errors. may not fully engage audience. . Responses with demonstrable errors. may overrun or be too short. Limited or largely incorrect information given. Interesting presentation. Reasonable project plan presented. enthusiasm of project team].