Ain Shams University

Faculty of Engineering

Course Major 27/12

Course Code: MDP 451 Failure Analysis Case study Date:
Name: task /2023
Student Name: Felopateer Wagih Baseet ِ Student ID: 20P4268
A (89-100) B (76-88) C (67-75) D (60-66)
100 96 92 89 88 84 80 76 75 72 69 67 66 64 62 60
Critical evaluation  Critical evaluation Accurate description of  Limited/ insufficient
Literature and synthesis of failure of failure analysis case failure analysis case evaluation and
survey analysis case study study study description of failure
analysis case study

 Complete set of Limited problem  Poorly/lack defined

Clearly defined problem
problem statement and statement and problem statement and
Objectives statement with well-
objectives objectives and objectives
structured the objectives
definition

 Express a deep  Express a very good  Express a good  Express a

understanding of
Methodology procedures of the
experiment and its
outputs
Analysis of  Good analysis of
 Excellent analysis of
results and
results and complete
conclusions relevant conclusions
understanding of understanding of moderate/fair
procedures of the procedures of the understanding of
experiment and its experiment and its procedures of the
outputs outputs experiment and its
outputs
 Normal analysis of  Incomplete analysis
results missing some results missing some or results with some
minor conclusions basic conclusions conclusions

1st Marker Total 17 1st Marker Signature Nahid Azab ASU Agreed % 85%
nd
2 Marker Total 17 nd
2 Marker Signature Marwan Faisel UEL Agreed % 67%
General Comments: UEL Grading System Agreed ASU Grading Scale
Mark
 Everyone in the group worked on the case study % equivalent at UEL Range % at ASU Grade

with seriousness and attention. The work was 95% and higher 97% and higher A+
82% to less than 95% 93% to less than 97% A
divided among all members, and each student 70% to less than 82% 89% to less than 93% A-
66% to less than 70% 84% to less than 89% B+
performed what was required of him. Periodic 63% to less than 66% 80% to less than 84% B
discussions were taken seriously, and the required 60% to less than 63% 76% to less than 80% B-
56% to less than 60% 73% to less than 76% C+
observations and modifications were achieved. 53% to less than 56% 70% to less than 73% C
50% to less than 53% 67% to less than 70% C-
 However, there are still some shortcomings in
45% to less than 50% 64% to less than 67% D+
writing the scientific report. There is a lack of 40% to less than 45% 60% to less than 64% D
Less than 40% Less than 60% F
professionalism in writing technical reports