ESC 101F 2017 – Engineering Science Praxis I

University of Toronto

Faculty of Applied Science and Engineering

Final Examination

December 8, 2017

General Instructions

If you have not already done so, rename this exam file as utorid--final.doc
(where utorid is replaced with your UTorID) and save it.

All answers should be inserted directly into this document. To make your answers stand out from the exam text, select a legible font colour other than black (e.g blue).

Save the document regularly to ensure no loss of data.

Question 1 – Connections

(20% – estimated 25 minutes)

A set of concepts introduced in Praxis is represented in the bulleted list below.

  1. Choose exactly five (5) concepts from the bulleted list.
  2. Connect each concept you selected in step A to two (2) other concepts from Praxis.

You must not connect your selected concept to any concept that appears in the
bulleted list below.

You must not use any concept from Praxis more than once when answering
Question 1.

A connection could be either:

  1. a “concept-to-concept” connection such as “Objectives link to Metrics,” which then needs to be justified, or
  2. a “considerations in engineering practice” connection, such as “an engineer might have to prioritize objectives,” which then needs to be justified.
  1. For each of the 10 connections that you made in step B, justify the connection.

For each connection, the System 1 appropriateness of the connection is worth 0.5%, and the
System 2 justification is worth 1.5%.

The concepts introduced in Praxis that you must select from to develop your answer to Question 1 are:

  • Warrant
  • Balance
  • Anchoring
  • Model
  • Metric
  • Judgment
  • Risk

Remember to start by selectingexactly five (5) concepts from the list above. When you have completed this question, you should have referred to fifteen (15) unique Praxis concepts and made ten (10) justified connections.

[enter text here]

STOP AND CHECK
Have you selected five (5) concepts from the list and for each made and justified two (2) connections without violating any constraints?

Question 2 – Short Answers

(25% – estimated 35 minutes)

  1. In the TELS system you provided feedback on behaviours related to Organizational, Relational, and Communication competencies. Identify and explain using evidence from your Praxis I experience which one (1) of these competencies you feel most contributes to an effective team. (5%)

[enter text here]

  1. To answer the question “Which stakeholders should our team include in our framing?” what type(s) of resource(s) would you consult and why?(4%)

[enter text here]

  1. Describe two (2) factors that you would consider when deciding whether to use either a holistic or a criteria-referenced decision making tool? Explain your answers.(4%)

[enter text here]

  1. If you were given a Design Brief that included engineering requirements, identify:
  1. Two (2) things that you would check to verify (e.g. assess the internal coherence and consistency of) the requirements. Explain how checking those things contributes to verifying the requirements. (6%)

[enter text here]

  1. One (1) thing that you would check to validate the requirements. Explain how checking that thing contributes to validating the requirements. (3%)

[enter text here]

  1. In class we discussed how given the objective of “stay hydrated” and the metric “litres of water consumed over 24 hours” the shape of the utility graph (aka. criterion) would be an “inverted U” .

For the two criteria (aka. utility graphs) shown below, give one (1) different real-world example where the criterion would have that shape. Briefly explain your example and reasoning.
(1.5% + 1.5%)

  1. A descending step function with a single step

[enter text here]

  1. A ‘U’ or ‘bathtub’ shape

[enter text here]

STOP AND CHECK
Have you answered parts A, B, C, D, and E of Question 2?
Have you answered both sub-parts of part D?
Have you answered both sub-parts of part E?

Question 3 – Interpreting, Recommending, and Iterating

(55% – estimated 75 minutes)

Engineering Science students have to travel across campus many times each day to transition between (e.g.) lectures, tutorials, food, exercise, sleep, etc. The Division of Engineering Science is regularly asked to recommend a personal transportation device that incoming students should bring with them to travel across campus.

A team of student engineers was asked by the Division to provide such a recommendation. Due to poor teamwork and time management, the team was only able to produce the following list of Stakeholders, table of Alternatives, and tabular Ratings Matrix.

List 1: Stakeholders

  • The (incoming or current) Engineering Science Student (who is traveling across campus)
  • The Parents of the Engineering Science Student (who are likely purchasing the personal transportation device and who feel a sense of responsibility for their child)
  • Other Campus Traffic (e.g. pedestrians, cyclists, vehicles, etc., who are also trying to safely traverse the campus)
  • Campus Police (who are responsible for safety on campus and for lost or stolen articles)

Table 1: Alternatives

Footwear
/ Bicycle
/ Skateboard
/ Shared Rickshaw
(One student pulls and one student rides.
Then they swap.)
/ Hoverboard
(powered)

Table 2: Ratings Matrix

Objectives / Metrics / Footwear / Bicycle / Skateboard / Shared Rickshaw / Hoverboard
Safety / Protection from the elements (Y/N)
(Greater is preferred) / N / N / N / Y / N
Likelihood of an accident per trip (%)
(Lesser is preferred) / < 2% / 5% / 10% / < 5% / 15%
Accessibility / (Greater is preferred) / High / Low-Med / Low / High / Med-Low
Cost / Purchase Price ($)
(Higher is preferred) / $20-$300 / $50 -$2000 / $30-$200 / $1500 -$2500 / $200-$500
Operating and maintenance costs
($ per year) (Lesser is preferred) / $0 / $50 / $25 / No data / $100-$250
Security / Likelihood of being lost or stolen per trip (%) (Lesser is preferred) / 0% / 15% / 3% / No data / 20%
Usability / Training time to feel comfortable (minutes) (Lesser is preferred) / 0min / 30min / 60min / 15min / 90min
Energy expenditure per trip (calories) (“U shaped”) / 50 cal / 30 cal / 40 cal / 110 cal / ≈ 0 cal
  1. Correctly use an appropriate holistic decision making tool to rank the Objectives. Explain two (2) key decisions you made during the ranking.(5%)

[enter text here]

  1. Correctly convert the Ratings Matrix into a Pugh Chart. Explain two (2) key decisions you made during the conversion.(5%)

[enter text here]

  1. Based only on the information provided and on your analysis in Parts A and B, recommend which type of personal transportation device Engineering Science students should use to travel across campus. The Division will share your recommendation with incoming and current students. (10%)

[enter text here]

  1. The Division has hired you to critique and iterate on the work done by the previous team.
  1. With respect to their Framing of the opportunity (as shown in the lists and tables) identify two (2) key issues with what the previous team developed and explain their significance. Identify one (1) key action you would complete to significantly improve the framing of the opportunity. Justify your choice of action.(10%)

[enter text here]

  1. With respect to their preparation for Converging (as shown in the lists and tables) identify two (2) key issues with what the previous team developed and explain their significance. Identify one (1) key action you would complete to significantly improve future convergence. Justify your choice of action. (10%)

[enter text here]

  1. Choose exactly one (1) of the actions you identified in part D. Outline a research strategy (including types ofsources and search terms) that you would follow to locate and acquire additional resources to support your work. Justify your strategy.(5%)

[enter text here]

STOP AND CHECK
Have you answered parts A, B, C, D, and E of Question 2?
Have you answered all three (3) sub-parts of part D?