Portland State University B.S.M.E. Program

Rubrics for ABET Outcome (c):an ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs within realistic constraints such as economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health and safety, manufacturability, and sustainability.

Level 4
Developing realistic Product Design Specifications (PDS). / Students identified all product-related constituencies and interviewed them to develop the PDS. The PDS was comprehensive and attention was given to economics, environmental, legal, social, political, health and safety, manufacturability, ergonomics, and sustainability issues.
Understanding of the Design Process / The student work shows a clear understating of the steps required in the product development cycle. Their plans and project milestones clearly follows the design methodology guidelines.
Benchmarking and product parametric analysis / The design requirements are well refined beyond customer statements through development of engineering specifications and setting of engineering targets based on competitive benchmarking, parametric analysis of market, and evaluation of the state-of-the-art technologies.
Project planning and resource management / The design process followed a dynamic plan based on the major tasks in the design process. All effort was focused to develop major and minor tasks to support the overall plan. Tasks were properly divided between team members and time and funding resources were adequately managed.
External Search / The students comprehensively researched the web, library resources, patent resources, and trade journals for existing products and related technologies, and identified multiple of existing solutions or similar solutions in other technologies
Internal Search / The students held multiple brainstorming sessions and developed a variety of solution concepts including creative and unusual solutions. They used the external/internal search process for all critical conceptual developments.
Concept evaluations, group decision-making processes / The students followed a systematic matrix-based decision-making process for selection of top-level solutions as well as major sub-systems of the design. The group welcomed all members to argue in favor of various design in an unhampered environment. The final selection addressed all PDS criteria.
Engineering analysis, detailed design, proper reporting / The reports indicate that the students are highly competent in the application of engineering analysis tools for transforming a concept into a detailed and complete bill of materials.
Prototyping and experimentations / Students planned, delivered, and evaluated their prototypes and compared the prototype performance with the engineering targets. Prototypes and experiments showed high ability for setting up instrumentation, data analysis, and fabrication of prototypes.
Organizing, documenting, justifying, and presenting the design / The final reports compile the entire design process from the development of PDS to the description of the details of final product. The report focuses on evaluations and comparisons with targets and objectively evaluates the success of the design in all respects.
Level 1
Developing realistic Product Design Specifications (PDS). / Students did not clearly identify the product constituencies and relied on guess-work and incomplete list of requirements through brief contacts with sponsors. The PDS only focused on performance requirements and ignored other important issues.
Understanding of the Design Process / The student jumped immediately into creating concepts and did not appear to understand or follow the design process. They lacked proper plans and milestones and followed a haphazard development process
Benchmarking and product parametric analysis / The design requirements remained as customer statements without development of engineering specifications or engineering targets.No competitive benchmarking or parametric analysis was performed.
Project planning and resource management / A plan was developed but was not updated or properly followed throughout. Tasks were identified spontaneously and there was little focus and continuity in progress. The team members often did not know what they are expected to deliver.
External Search / The external search did not go beyond web search for similar products.
Internal Search / Some brainstorming sessions were held for the top-level concept but the team clearly missed some important ideas and did not venture into highly creative ideas or exploration of new technologies.
Concept evaluations, group decision-making processes / The team did not regularly follow a systematic decision-making process such as matrix methods. Decisions were often made by one individual and there was no opportunity to objectively discuss the merits of various concepts in the context of PDS requirements.
Engineering analysis, detailed design, proper reporting / The reports indicate that the students are unaware of related analysis methods or are incapable of applying them in the context of design. Many detailed decisions were made based on guess-work. When analysis were performed, they were not presented properly.
Prototyping and experimentations / Students did not adequately plan for the fabrication and testing of their prototypes. Poor fabrication quality affected the performance of the product. The team did not evaluate all relevant PDS targets or applied improper test and evaluation methods. Prototypes and experiments showed weakness in setting up instrumentation, data analysis, and fabrication of prototypes.
Organizing, documenting, justifying, and presenting the design / The final reports did not document the entire design process. The report focuses on details rather than final evaluations and comparisons with targets. The conclusions do not objectively evaluate the success of the design in all respects.

Scoring Sheet for ABET Outcome (c):an ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs within realistic constraints such as economic, environmental, social, political, ethical, health and safety, manufacturability, and sustainability.

Date of Assessment: June 2015

Evaluator:______

Capstone Team:______

When grading you can use plus or minus signs in each category, for example a + in the B box means B+, a – means B-, and a check mark means B.

Please circle keywords in the “rubrics page” for any item you think the team showed lack of awareness or weakness. Leave blank the items not covered.

Criterion / A / B / C / D / N/A
Developing realistic Product Design Specifications (PDS).
Understanding of the Design Process
Benchmarking and product parametric analysis
Project planning and resource management
External Search
Internal Search
Concept evaluations, group decision-making processes
Engineering analysis, detailed design, proper reporting
Prototyping and experimentations
Organizing, documenting, justifying, and presenting the design