MSD Project Risk Assessment Template

ID / Risk Item / Effect / Cause / Likelihood / Severity / Importance / Action to Minimize Risk / Owner
Describe the risk briefly / What is the effect on any or all of the project deliverables if the cause actually happens? / What are the possible cause(s) of this risk? / L*S / What action(s) will you take (and by when) to prevent, reduce the impact of, or transfer the risk of this occurring? / Who is responsible for following through on mitigation?
1 / Autofeeder doesn’t work / Fish will have to be fed by hand, decreasing automatic nature of rig / Overcomplexity, parts aren’t water proof / 1 / 1 / 1 / Deploy a simple of design as possible to prevent problems; thoroughly test before employment
2 / DUS Sensor not in range / Data cannot be collected the way required for the project, severely derailing the project, if not halting it all together / DUS sensor does not have depth range to measure the required values from the fish, fish does not come close enough to DUS sensor / 3 / 3 / 9 / Create redundant range sensors and gimble to make DUS closer to fish. Try and get sensor as close to fish as possible
3 / Going over budget / Cannot complete design as intended and have to make due with what is available without purchasing new components / Overspending on unnecessary components, not using what’s already available / 1 / 1 / 1 / Keep updated list of required material
4 / Fish dies / A new fish would have to be retrained which would in turn take time and possibly delay data acquisition / Forgetting to feed, horrific data acquisition rig accident / 1 / 2 / 2 / Keep track of fish’s health, follow RIT IACUC requirements
5 / Fish doesn’t feed / Data cannot be accurately or consistently acquired, significantly delaying or halting project end-goal / Overfeeding so it’s not hungry, irregular tank conditions / 2 / 2 / 4 / Train fish for regular feeding and keep it in the same tank to keep it comfortable with its surroundings
6 / Test rig is too big/heavy / Rig cannot be moved as promised in the customer requirements and specs. It will also be harder to disassemble/reassemble and runs the risk of not being able to display at ImagineRIT / Heavy materials, PIV and DUS weighing more than originally expected. Ignorance to rig contruction efficiency / 2 / 2 / 4 / Keep updated materials in CAD files to determine weight and size. Always be looking for ways to cut out unnecessary weight in materials and construction
7 / Can’t get data off of DUS without human / Data acquisition is significantly delayed and the whole process must factor in manually transferring data from DUS, adding 2+ minutes to each acquisition cycle / DUS has inability to interface with PC for PC to grab data off of it / 2 / 2 / 4 / Discuss with DUS techs ad supplier to find any software/drivers that could be used to interface PC with DUS
8 / Rig too delicate to move / Rig mobility specs and requirements are not delivered on and possibly cannot be displayed at ImagineRIT / Fragility of materials and careless construction / 2 / 1 / 2 / Create simple structural and analysis models. Continually perform strength tests
9 / Blindness from LASER / Impair blind group member’s ability to contribute to project progress / A wayward laser and a lack of safety precautions / 1 / 3 / 3 / Follow NYS LASER safety regulations
10 / Non-repeatable triggering of data / Inability to repeat data acquisition defeats the purpose of having a test rig. Customer reqs will not be delivered upon / Inconsistent equipment that only captures the correct data once / 3 / 1 / 3 / Redundant sensors to ensure accurate data acquisition every time
12 / Tank leaks / Possible water-damaged electrical components, possible dead fish / Micro-strains in the glass, part of rig slams against glass accidentally / 2 / 1 / 2 / Test tank before use and patch up any cracks
13 / PIV Equipment malfunctions / Cannot acquire data for reference to DUS data / Damaged in setup, or setup incorrectly / 2 / 1 / 2 / Discuss with Dr. Day about proper use and setup of PIV equipment
14 / FOV of DUS is too small to collect entire profile / Accurate data could possibly not be collected, difficult to compare different scopes of data (PIV and DUS) / DUS doesn’t have as wide of a FOV as required / 3 / 1 / 3 / Talk with DUS techs and suppliers. Narrow PIV so that it matches for better reference data
15 / Broken PIV and/or DUS equipment / Delays progress of project indefinitely until it gets fixed / Mishandling of equipment, accidental breakage / 1 / 3 / 3 / Receive proper training on equipment and treat it delicately. Fix it ASAP if broken
16 / Shipping/product delays / Delays project progress until components arrive / Ordering a part too late in the process, finding out that a different part is needed / 3 / 1 / 3 / Order material ahead of time and make sure it’s the proper material. “Measure twice, cut once”
17 / DUS doesn’t match PIV / Significant testing would need to be done to prove that it’s not the rig, it’s process producing unmatched answers / DUS’s inability to accurately measure the flow rate around a fish’s mouth / 1 / 3 / 3 / Take continued readings to verify that they match throughout the development cycle. Revisit idea that DUS would produce the results desired
18 / Computer doesn’t have enough processing power to capture high-frame rate and process both PIV and DUS / Data acquisition could be inaccurate because of delayed capture / Lack of processing power to gather all info required in a split-second / 1 / 3 / 3 / Closely monitor CPU and memory usage of computer upon each aspect of acquisition (PIV, DUS, High-frame rate video capture)
Likelihood scale / Severity scale
1 - This cause is unlikely to happen / 1 - The impact on the project is very minor. We will still meet deliverables on time and within budget, but it will cause extra work
2 - This cause could conceivably happen / 2 - The impact on the project is noticeable. We will deliver reduced functionality, go over budget, or fail to meet some of our Engineering Specifications.
3 - This cause is very likely to happen / 3 - The impact on the project is severe. We will not be able to deliver, or what we deliver will not meet the customer's needs.
“Importance Score” (Likelihood x Severity) – use this to guide your preference for a risk management strategy
Prevent / Action will be taken to prevent the cause(s) from occurring in the first place.
Reduce / Action will be taken to reduce the likelihood of the cause and/or the severity of the effect on the project, should the cause occur
Transfer / Action will be taken to transfer the risk to something else. Insurance is an example of this. You purchase an insurance policy that contractually binds an insurance company to pay for your loss in the event of accident. This transfers the financial consequences of the accident to someone else. Your car is still a wreck, of course.
Accept / Low importance risks may not justify any action at all. If they happen, you simply accept the consequences.