User Tools
project-wiki:design_reviews:subsystem_engineering_review
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision | ||
|
project-wiki:design_reviews:subsystem_engineering_review [2022/02/08 14:23] cds4byu [Questions] |
project-wiki:design_reviews:subsystem_engineering_review [2023/08/30 16:23] (current) bdj2 [Evaluation Rubrics] |
||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 27: | Line 27: | ||
| - | The Subsystem Engineering design review occurs in February at a date negotiated between the team and the | + | The Subsystem Engineering design review occurs in late February |
| pod instructor. The team will propose a date in the Project Milestones Table. | pod instructor. The team will propose a date in the Project Milestones Table. | ||
| consistent with the instructor and the external review coaches' | consistent with the instructor and the external review coaches' | ||
| Line 46: | Line 46: | ||
| finding and making plans to remove any weaknesses present. | finding and making plans to remove any weaknesses present. | ||
| - | ==== Questions | + | ==== Artifact Submission for Subsystem Engineering |
| + | |||
| + | In preparation for the Subsystem Engineering review, the team will prepare and submit a pdf file containing the artifacts listed below. These artifacts should answer the questions, "What is the complete system design, including the subsystem designs and their integration?" | ||
| + | |||
| + | The submitted artifacts and the review should demonstrate | ||
| + | that the design has evolved | ||
| + | enough to meet the requirements for the end of Subsystem Engineering. Satisfactorily | ||
| + | addressing the questions above constitute the minimum requirements for completion of | ||
| + | Subsystem Engineering. | ||
| + | |||
| + | While not required, it is helpful for both the team and the reviewers to include | ||
| + | a measured performance memo at the front of the submitted artifacts. | ||
| + | This memo | ||
| + | should: (a) highlight measurements that show the subsystems work properly, and | ||
| + | (b) reference artifacts that show more detail on these measurements. | ||
| + | The presence or absence of the summary memo will not affect the review grade. | ||
| - | - What is the complete system design, including the subsystem designs and their integration? | ||
| - Primary Artifacts: | - Primary Artifacts: | ||
| - | * No primary artifacts exist for the design. | ||
| - | - Supporting Artifacts: | ||
| - | * System Design Package (including ,at a minimum, bill of materials, system and subsystem assembly drawings, part drawings for all custom parts, and interface definitions for subsystem interfaces). Pay close attention to the details described on [[https:// | ||
| - | - How do you know that the subsystems independently meet the Project Success Agreement and other requirements and will be compatible with one another? | ||
| - | - Primary artifacts: | ||
| * Measured performance summary for each subsystem | * Measured performance summary for each subsystem | ||
| - | * Requirements matrix for each subsystem, including | + | * Requirements matrix |
| * Measured and predicted performance summary for the system | * Measured and predicted performance summary for the system | ||
| - | * System requirements matrix with predicted values for performance measures | + | * System requirements matrix |
| - Supporting Artifacts: | - Supporting Artifacts: | ||
| + | * System Design Package (including ,at a minimum, bill of materials or software bill of materials, system and subsystem assembly drawings, part drawings for all custom parts, and interface definitions for subsystem interfaces). Pay close attention to the details described on [[https:// | ||
| * Up-to-date approved Project Success Agreement, revised as necessary | * Up-to-date approved Project Success Agreement, revised as necessary | ||
| * Test results obtained using models and/or prototypes, for both the subsystems and the system. Pay special attention to Figure 1 ([[https:// | * Test results obtained using models and/or prototypes, for both the subsystems and the system. Pay special attention to Figure 1 ([[https:// | ||
| Line 67: | Line 77: | ||
| * Other detailed artifacts that support your evaluation of the performance of the subsystems and the system | * Other detailed artifacts that support your evaluation of the performance of the subsystems and the system | ||
| - | [{{ project-wiki: | + | [{{ project-wiki: |
| - | ==== Content | + | ==== Evaluation Rubrics |
| - | The submitted artifacts and the review should demonstrate | ||
| - | that the design has evolved | ||
| - | enough to meet the requirements for the end of Subsystem Engineering. | ||
| - | artifacts should address the questions listed above. | ||
| - | addressing these questions constitute the minimum requirements for completion of | ||
| - | Subsystem Engineering. | ||
| - | While not required, it is helpful | + | The submitted artifacts will be reviewed |
| - | a measured performance memo at the front of the submitted | + | Although |
| - | This memo | + | |
| - | should: (a) highlight measurements that show the subsystems work properly, and | + | |
| - | (b) reference artifacts that show more detail | + | |
| - | The presence or absence of the summary memo will not affect the review | + | |
| - | ==== Evaluation Rubric ==== | + | The rubrics used in the evaluation is shown below. |
| + | |||
| + | The scoresheets used by the evaluators are available on Box for [[https:// | ||
| - | The submitted artifacts will be reviewed for how clearly and completely the answer the questions above. | ||
| - | Although the emphasis in the review will be on Question 2, an advisory grade will be given on the system design package as well. The advisory grade will not count in your final grade. | ||
| - | The rubric shown below will be used by the evaluators. | ||
| - | [[https:// | ||
| <nodisp 16> | <nodisp 16> | ||
| - | NOTE TO INSTRUCTORS: | + | NOTE TO INSTRUCTORS: |
| consistent with the scoresheets. | consistent with the scoresheets. | ||
| </ | </ | ||
| - | |||
| **Evaluation rubric for Subsystem Engineering stage** | **Evaluation rubric for Subsystem Engineering stage** | ||
| ^Element ^ Item(weight) ^ Excellent (9-10) ^ Good (7-8) ^ Poor (0-6) ^ | ^Element ^ Item(weight) ^ Excellent (9-10) ^ Good (7-8) ^ Poor (0-6) ^ | ||
| |Primary Artifacts -- reviewers evaluate all ^< | |Primary Artifacts -- reviewers evaluate all ^< | ||
| |::: ^< | |::: ^< | ||
| - | |::: ^< | + | |::: ^< |
| |::: ^< | |::: ^< | ||
| |Supporting Artifacts -- reviewers spot check ^< | |Supporting Artifacts -- reviewers spot check ^< | ||
| - | |::: ^< | + | |::: ^< |
| + | |::: ^< | ||
| |::: ^< | |::: ^< | ||
| |::: ^< | |::: ^< | ||
| | ^< | | ^< | ||
| - | |< | + | |< |
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | <nodisp 16> | ||
| + | NOTE TO INSTRUCTORS: | ||
| + | consistent with the scoresheets. | ||
| + | </ | ||
| + | **Evaluation rubric for Subsystem Engineering stage on software projects** | ||
| + | ^Element ^ Item(weight) ^ Excellent (9-10) ^ Good (7-8) ^ Poor (0-6) ^ | ||
| + | |Primary Artifacts -- reviewers evaluate all ^< | ||
| + | |::: ^< | ||
| + | |::: ^< | ||
| + | |::: ^< | ||
| + | |Supporting Artifacts -- reviewers spot check ^< | ||
| + | |::: ^< | ||
| + | |::: ^< | ||
| + | |::: ^< | ||
| + | | ^< | ||
| + | |< | ||
| ==== Mechanics ==== | ==== Mechanics ==== | ||
| Line 125: | Line 141: | ||
| The mechanics of Subsystem Engineering reviews are as follows: | The mechanics of Subsystem Engineering reviews are as follows: | ||
| - | - No later than 10:00 AM three class days (not counting weekends or holidays) ahead of the scheduled review, the team submits the artifact package, as described above. The submission is done from the [[https:// | + | - No later than **10:00 AM three class days** (not counting weekends or holidays) |
| - No later than 8:00 AM one class day (not counting weekends or holidays) ahead of the scheduled review, the two coaches who are assigned to review the team will complete their grading and written evaluation of the artifact package. | - No later than 8:00 AM one class day (not counting weekends or holidays) ahead of the scheduled review, the two coaches who are assigned to review the team will complete their grading and written evaluation of the artifact package. | ||
| - The team prepares an oral presentation no more than five minutes in length that includes the project objective statement and discusses why the team believes they are ready for stage approval, including responses to the evaluator comments where appropriate. | - The team prepares an oral presentation no more than five minutes in length that includes the project objective statement and discusses why the team believes they are ready for stage approval, including responses to the evaluator comments where appropriate. | ||
| - At the review, the team will make their brief presentation and demonstrate prototypes used to evaluate the subsystem designs. | - At the review, the team will make their brief presentation and demonstrate prototypes used to evaluate the subsystem designs. | ||
| - | - The reviewers, the team, and the coach will discuss the answers to the questions as contained in the artifacts and the presentation for 18 minutes. | + | - The reviewers, the team, and the coach will discuss the answers to the questions as contained in the artifacts and the presentation for 28 minutes. |
| - After consulting with the review coaches, the instructor will spend two minutes to communicate the results of the review to the team. Possible results are: | - After consulting with the review coaches, the instructor will spend two minutes to communicate the results of the review to the team. Possible results are: | ||
| * Stage approval is granted unconditionally. | * Stage approval is granted unconditionally. | ||
project-wiki/design_reviews/subsystem_engineering_review.1644355411.txt.gz · Last modified: 2022/02/08 14:23 by cds4byu
Page Tools
Except where otherwise noted, content on this wiki is licensed under the following license: Copyright Brigham Young University, all rights reserved
