1 Introduction
This module aims to give students experience of working on a significant assignment as part of a project team. There are only a couple of lectures, BUT students must hold regular group meetings, the member of staff supervising the assignment will be present at some of the formal meetings and to ensure the success of the project students should make every effort to attend all meetings.

Groups (normally consisting of 5 - 8 students) may select one of the following assignments:

2.1 Ring Barking Tool
To ensure production of good quality timber, it is common practice in UK conifer forests to kill selected trees (sometimes 20% of the total) and allow the remainder to grow to maturity. Presently, selected trees may be killed by the use of a chemical injected into the main stem during the growing season. Although very effective. the chemical is both toxic and expensive and its use raises objections on grounds of conservation etc.
An alternative approach for killing selected trees is to 'ring bark' the main stem, ie to remove a complete 360 degree ring of bark through the cambium layer using some form of hand tool. Such a tool is expected to have worthwhile economic and conservation advantages over the chemical method.
Using the specification given, design a suitable tool and show all the necessary features and information on a general assembly drawing(s). All relevant calculations, information, original and conceptual ideas, etc. should be included in the report.

Design Specification
1 Trees are conifer, mostly spruce. in the diameter range 100 to 23Omm, and can he very resinous.
2 Trees are planted in a square pattern of pitch l.82 to 2m. Access to a tree is generally restricted and should preferably be from one side only, ie the tool is likely to be used with the operative in a fixed standing position. The operative cannot walk round the tree 'winch' fashion.
3 The tool should remove a ring of bark not less than 25mm wide X 4mm deep
4 The tool is likely to be attached to the tree from waist height down to about 3OOmm from the ground.
5 If possible, one tool should accommodate the size range given in 1.
6 The tool should be manual in operation, light and robust for use in a forest environment.
7 Time required to process one tree should not exceed 2 minutes.
From 'SEED' - Sharing Experience in Engineering Design, Compendium of Projects.

2.2 Road Friction Testing Machine
Tests are carried out periodically on major roads to assess their friction (accumulations of oil and rubber can seriously reduce the coefficient of friction).
You are required to design a suitable portable rig to carry out such tests, that can be deployed from the back of a van or estate car.
Your design should include a range of capabilities, ie easy change of test tyre - assuming you are using a test tyre; the ability to artificially wet the surface in a controlled manner and flexible measuring capabilities.
As well as the basic mechanical design of the system, you will need to consider how undulations and bumpiness in the road surface can be treated to avoid inappropriate results. You will need to specify the electronics of the measurement system and how the coefficient of friction will be calculated and reported.

2.3 Wave Powered Electricity Generating Device
There is increasing interest in renewable energy sources and one obvious option for the UK is wave energy. A number of devices have been designed and some have been tested, mostly with limited success. The maximum wave forces that such devices have to withstand are very large.
You are required to select what you believe to be the best type of system and produce a design for the chosen system. It is up to you to decide on the scale of your design eg: prototype or full size.

If you wish to design and build a prototype - and can convince me that your ideas are good - then there will be a budget of £600 available to manufacture your device. The marking scheme in this case will be:

• a) Written report content on: Design, analysis, materials, manufacture - 30%
• b) The physical prototype and tests - 30%
• c) Written report content on: Manufacture, testing and review - 30%
• d) Oral presentation - 10%

2.4 Device to enable people in wheel chairs to use stairs
The usual way of providing for this is to add a system to the stairs which carries the wheelchair and user. This system has the disadvantage that expensive conversions or additions, often custom built, are needed for every flight of stairs.
A possible alternative is to design a suitable attachment to a wheelchair to enable it to negotiate safely (almost) any stairs the user encounters. Your assignment is to design a system of this type which can be fixed to a wheelchair when it is likely to be needed and removed when not needed.

2.5 General Purpose Crane for Ships - slightly different to this:
Survey and support vessels need a general purpose crane that can be used to load and unload a range of supplies, equipment and test apparatus etc. You are required to produce a design for a crane with the following capacity:

3.1 Assessment
Assessment will be based 80% upon the written group submission and 20% upon an oral presentation.

Advice on what constitutes a good design report and how to avoid loss of marks was discussed in the stage 2 Engineering Design modules, DSGN 215 and DSGN 221. If you did not take this module or are in any way unclear about this matter, you should study the introduction to that module (at: http://www.tech.plym.ac.uk/sme/desframe.htm) in the near future. General advice about assessment is contained in your student handbook, a link is provided in the 'Index to Online Documentation'. You should look at this if you are not familiar with it.

NB: It is common for students to do a reasonable quantity of work, but unfortunately due to lack of planning or thought some do not get a good mark for the time they have spent. It is vital that you plan your work carefully, both individually and as a group and work consistently through the year and regularly review your work and plans to ensure that you are heading in the right direction.

In addition to the written reports, this module also involves assessment of an oral presentation. This will be a 'boardroom' type presentation where each group will present their solution to the Design staff. Every member of each group must speak and the total time allocated for the group presentation will by 3 x number of persons in the group, minutes. You should note that attendance at this presentation - and speaking - is mandatory, absence without validated extenuating circumstances will result in the loss of the marks for this part of the assessment.

There is guidance in the student handbook about group working and presentations and a lecture will be held on each of these topics.

3.2 Assessment Requirements
To ensure the smooth running of the work and to enable us to give individual marks it is important that the following be observed:

i) You must elect a group chair person and a group secretary.

ii) You must hold regular formal meetings, academic staff will be present at some of these meetings (for distance learners some of these must be in the meeting slots at the local college so a member of staff can attend). Other informal meetings need not be face to face, but may be by internet 'meeting room'. Formal minutes must be recorded by the secretary and circulated. The member of staff is present primarily as an observer: to ensure that all members are contributing, that nothing is going seriously wrong - technically or organisationally. The staff member may from time to time to join in the discussion.

iii) Although each group hands in 1 group report, individuals are expected to take responsibility for sections and the person must put his/her name - clearly written - at the bottom of every page in the report for which they were responsible.

iv) Every group member must include a brief description of their initial ideas.

v) Every group member must include a brief review of the overall design.

vi) Peer assessment forms will be issued to all groups which must be completed and returned. Where a group has worked well and everyone is judged to have contributed reasonably, these will probably make no difference. Where there have been problems or where the quality of contributions by group members has varied significantly, these marks will be taken into account.

vii) A copy of the complete report, plus any additional items submitted - eg computer files etc., must be submitted on a CD.

3.3 The Marking Scheme (except for 2.3)