75% Preliminary Engineering Report Due
- Due Oct 21, 2021 by 7:45am
- Points 260
- Submitting a file upload
- File Types pdf
- Available Sep 6, 2021 at 12am - Oct 28, 2021 at 7:45am
Reports, specifications, drawings typically go through a number of internal and external reviews before they are complete. Formal review at 30%, 60%, and 90% is common. Your team should conduct its own internal reviews before submitting this 75% review document. Your team should prepare this document as "100%" complete, with no additional work required on your part. However, comments and markups by the final review team (in this case your instructors) are likely and should be addressed by your team for the final submittal.
Upload a pdf of your 75% report to Canvas and submit two (2) printed and bound copies of the preliminary engineering report at the beginning of class.
The written content of this report must not exceed 50 pages. Full page figures, maps, table of contents, are not counted toward this total.
Guidance and direction for preparation of the Preliminary Engineering Report can be found at this link, Preparing a Preliminary Engineering Report White Paper.docx.
Links to an external site.
White Papers and additional information on topics that will help you prepare the PER (and other course related documents) can be found here;
Life Cycle Cost Analysis Professor Hicks.docx
Links to an external site.
Life Cycle Cost White Paper.docx Links to an external site.
Preparing Cost_Opinions White Paper .doc Links to an external site.
Professor Hicks has prepared a spreadsheet that can be used for preparation of a decision matrix . A link to the matrix can be found here, Download here, and, her presentation describing its use can be found at this link Professor Hicks discussion of decision matrix. Links to an external site. .
Examples of recent student preliminary engineering reports (PER) can be found here, Example Team 3 Preliminary Engineering Report Durand Industrial Park Links to an external site.; Example Team 7 Preliminary Engineering Report Struvite Control Fdl WWTP Links to an external site..
Rubric
Criteria | Ratings | Pts |
---|---|---|
1. Included a signed transmittal/cover letter on company letterhead and did its contents meet expectations?
threshold:
pts
|
pts
--
|
|
2. Included a cover with project name, client name, date, and company logo? How well did its appearance meet expectations?
threshold:
pts
|
pts
--
|
|
3. Included the disclaimer?
threshold:
pts
|
pts
--
|
|
4. Identified the desired needs of the system, component, or process?
threshold:
pts
|
pts
--
|
|
5. Identified realistic constraints in each of the following categories? Economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health and safety, manufacturability, and sustainability.
threshold:
pts
|
pts
--
|
|
6. Developed at least three technically feasible alternative solutions?
threshold:
pts
|
pts
--
|
|
7. Compared the alternative solutions, using appropriate metrics?
threshold:
pts
|
pts
--
|
|
8. Recommended one of the solutions, by providing compelling, logical, credible, and audience-appropriate justifications for recommending a solution to a problem from a group of alternative solutions?
threshold:
pts
|
pts
--
|
|
9. The scope of the problem was sufficiently broad that no single team member could solve the problem alone?
threshold:
pts
|
pts
--
|
|
10. Broke down a system into its component parts, such that its performance could be understood?
threshold:
pts
|
pts
--
|
|
11. Analyzed well-defined engineering problems in at least four technical areas appropriate to civil engineering?
threshold:
pts
|
pts
--
|
|
12. Solved well-defined engineering problems in at least four technical areas appropriate to civil engineering?
threshold:
pts
|
pts
--
|
|
13. Created a realistic Project schedule with critical path items appropriate to the project?
threshold:
pts
|
pts
--
|
|
14. Created a realistic opinion of probable cost appropriate to the project?
threshold:
pts
|
pts
--
|
|
15. In defining, formulating, and solving their engineering problem, did the student or team consider the impacts of historical events and contemporary issues?
threshold:
pts
|
pts
--
|
|
16. Understood the economic sustainability of their engineering design?
threshold:
pts
|
pts
--
|
|
17. Understood the environmental sustainability of their engineering design?
threshold:
pts
|
pts
--
|
|
18. Understood the social sustainability (including cultural, psychological and political impacts) of their engineering design?
threshold:
pts
|
pts
--
|
|
19. Understood how the above impacts were important at the neighborhood, city, state, national, and global levels?
threshold:
pts
|
pts
--
|
|
20. Used modern computer software as a tool to solve an engineering problem?
threshold:
pts
|
pts
--
|
|
21. Used modern codes and standards as a tool to solve an engineering problem?
threshold:
pts
|
pts
--
|
|
22. Recognized uncertainties in data and knowledge and listed those relevant to the engineering design? Are these uncertainties discussed in multiple relevant sections?
threshold:
pts
|
pts
--
|
|
23. Distinguished between uncertainties that are data-based and those that are knowledge-based? Are data-based and knowledge-based uncertainties addressed in multiple relevant sections?
threshold:
pts
|
pts
--
|
|
24. Explained the significance of uncertainties on the performance and safety of an engineering system? Are these uncertainties addressed in multiple relevant sections?
threshold:
pts
|
pts
--
|
|
25. Effectively organized a written document? In assessing performance, please consider whether the document: Was effectively organized at the macro-level in an audience appropriate manner. Did the team discuss adjustments in scope and/or budget (as compared to the original RFP) that were agreed to by the client/mentors/instructors? Was effectively organized at the micro-level in an audience appropriate manner.
threshold:
pts
|
pts
--
|
|
26. Effectively delivered a written document? In assessing performance, please consider whether the document: Identified and created suitable graphics and equations and integrated them usefully to clarify technical concepts. Summarized and emphasized key conclusions and recommendations from a lengthy document into an Executive Summary (the summary should include supporting figures and/or tables). Employed clear, concise, unambiguous, and cohesive writing (with emphasis on correct mechanics and fluid style). Was free of spelling errors
threshold:
pts
|
pts
--
|