SCOTTISH QUALIFICATIONS AUTHORITY

MARKERS REPORT FORM

SUBJECT: 040-12 Engineering Knowledge - General

DATE: 27th March 2017

General Comments on Examination Paper

The majority of candidates produced stock answers which are mainly correct but do contain errors or do not
answer the question this being asked.
Some candidates produced excellent original answers but few candidates seem willing to go the extra mile in
explaining their answer or showing a deep understanding. Once again can I reiterate that one word answers are
meaningless on most occasions except when possibly making a list of items.

General Comments of Specific Examination Questions

Question 1
Most candidates scored well for parts (a) to (c) but did not do so well for part (d). Some candidates just stated
mono-syllabic answers such as “pressure” and “materials” the question is worth 4 marks so demands a lot
more than one word answers. Very few mentioned that the pipe may be lined internally, as in sea water piping.
No candidate mentioned that the pipe may require stress relieving. Perhaps these reasons are not in the book of
stock answers.

Question 2
Part (a) was mostly well done, with most candidates scoring 4 or 5 marks for the sketch but the answers to part
(b) were poor. Again stock answers, not paying much attention to the fitting of the new seals or describing the
vulcanizing or other process which allows the fitting of new seals in situ.

Question 3
Parts (a) and (b) were fine but few candidates mentioned viscosity in part (c) instead laboured on the density
difference between oil and water which is true and they scored a couple of marks. Candidates who aspire to be
Chief Engineers do not seem to know the difference between density and viscosity. No candidate mentioned
surface tension or buoyancy so that’s obviously not in the book either.

Question 4
(a) (i) The answers to this question were bordering on the ridiculous. Most candidates stated that returning rust
was the main problem and that it would lead to health problems, even that people would choke. Some said that
the air would be depleted of oxygen and some even said that CO2 would be formed. Of those who stated the
correct answer – the returning air would be diluted by ambient air – they never went on to say what effect this
would have on the plant.
(a)(ii) Very few candidates mentioned what the capacity control actually does and just stated vaguely that the
temperature would not be controlled. Why not?

Question 5
No real problems here.

Question 6
(a) Most candidates described a pour point test but a few described a viscosity test.
(b) Most candidates were vague on what could be done if the fuel had to be consumed.

Question 7
(a) Some candidates got control and suppression the wrong way round, but other than that this question was
well answered.
Question 8
Part (b)(i) was about promoting heat transfer and was well answered but not parts (ii) and (iii) which were about
retarding heat transfer. For part (b)(ii) a lot of candidates mentioned materials to promote heat transfer in the
evaporator and never mentioned insulation to stop the heat flow into the room, similarly for part (iii) many
candidates wrote about the pipe materials and some said that it had to be capable of withstanding superheated
steam – on an auxiliary steam system?

Question 9
(a) Some excellent sketches getting full marks and other more basic sketches getting proportionally fewer marks.

Question 10
(a) Similar comments to question 9, some excellent block diagrams, well annotated and other very basic efforts
which missed out parts of the UPS system. Not many candidates stated the voltages that were transformed and
rectified to or the subsequently inverted voltage at the output.
(b) No problems, an easy three marks for most.

Question 11
(a)(ii) A lot of candidates again stated one word answers such as “current” and “voltage” and lost marks. The
answers should be overcurrent and over voltage/under voltage. Small differences but how is the marker supposed
to know that the candidate understands this if it is not stated?
(b) A number of candidates stated the causes but not the reasons. Most candidates stated overheating and overload
as separate causes but they are very similar and often one is a consequence of the other. Most got earths or short
circuits as a cause but few stated loose connections causing arcing which can occur even when only moderate
current is flowing and protection devices may not be activated.

Question 12
Not the most popular question in the paper however eight candidates who attempted this got 10 out of 10 and
others scored quite highly too. Some candidates however scored zero marks for not describing an in-water survey,
instead they just listed a number of items that would be inspected in a dry dock. No mention of divers, ROV’s or
even of a surveyor being present. No mention of video and still camera recordings, in fact not a mention that the
vessel was in the water.

Question 13
Generally very well answered.

Question 14
(a) (i) Generally well answered but a number of candidates made mention of riveted bilge keels – what century
are we in?
(b) The stock answer for this was that bilge keels are difficult to fabricate and difficult to weld to the hull away
from the parallel middle body. Why? If structures like rudders and bulbous bows can be fabricated then why can’t
some flat bar be welded to the side of a ship? The real reasons are more to do with the ineffectiveness the closer
the bilge keel is to the rolling centre, increased resistance and more likelihood of damage.