PREAMBLE You have already formed your team. For Assessment 2, Team Project Report (Part-2), you should work with Hybrid Optimisation of Multiple Energy Resources (HOMER) software to carry out your team project work. You have already developed a project scope. Based on your Team Project Scope feedback, you must address those comments in the respective sections of your Team Project Report (Assessment 2, Part 2). Also, you should work on new sections to complete your Team Project Report. Make sure all work is equally distributed among all team members so that all team members work equally at an equal pace.
PROCEDURE
THE SUBMISSION GUIDELINES
The assessment should include but are not limited to
THE CALCULATION OF AN INDIVIDUAL TEAM MEMBER'S MARK IS AS FOLLOWS
Individual student’s mark = team total marks x (individual contribution / average team contribution).
Say, Team A received 15 marks (out of 20). The individual contributions of 3 students in Team A are: Student 1 = 33%, Student 2 = 35%, and Student 3 = 32% (total = 33 + 35 + 32 = 100%). Average team contribution = 100/3 = 33.33%.
Thus, the individual marks will be calculated as follows:
Student 1 = 15 x (33/33.33) = 14.85 (out of 20)
Student 2 = 15 x (35/33.33) = 15.75 (out of 20)
Student 3 = 15 x (32/33.33) = 14.40 (out of 20)
The assignment must be submitted electronically (in "MS Word" format) in Moodle. The file name should be "Your team’s name_unit code_assessment number.docx.". An example of a file format is "Team A_ENEG28001_A2 (Part-2).docx."
EACH TEAM MUST COMPLETE & ADD THE FOLLOWING TEAM CONTRIBUTION TABLE
Name of the contributor | Description of contributions | Contribution (%) |
Member 1’s Name and ID |
| Based on your contribution to the team’s task, put your reasonable percentage contribution in this column. |
This is the declaration of my contribution to the team project work.
Signature of Member 1 Signatures of other members
Add the necessary rows basedon the numberof your teammembers. |
MARKING RUBRICS TOTAL MARKS: 30
ELEMENTS | EXCELLENT [100%] | EXCELLENT- [87.5%] | GOOD [75%] | GOOD - [62.5%] | SOUND [50%] | SOUND - [37.5%] | SOUND - - [25%] | POOR [0%] |
Cover page, layout, andstructure
Max marks: 1 | Includes the unit code, title, all members’ names,IDs, project title submission date, table of contents, list of tablesand figures. The report shows sections, subsections and auto-generated page numbers. | Includes the unit code,title, all members’ names, ID, project title submission date, table of contents, list of tables and figures. The report shows sections, subsections, and page numbers. | Includes the unit code, title, all members’ names, ID, project title submission date, table of contents, list of tables and figures. The report shows sections, subsections, and erroneous page numbers. | Includes the unit code, title, all members’ names,ID, project title submission date, table of contents, list of tablesand figures. The report shows sections and subsections but no page number. | Includes the unit code, title, all members’ names, ID, project title submission date, table of contents, and list of tables and figures. | Includes the unit code, title, all members’ names, ID, project title submission date, table of contents, and list of tables. | Includes the unit code, title, all members’ names, ID, project title submission date, and tableof contents. | It was an inappropriate format and did not meet the requirements. |
Abstract
Max marks: 1 | The abstract contains an excellent problem statement, aim, brief methodology, outcomes, andimplications. It follows 5-6 appropriate keywords. | The abstract contains an excellent problem statement, aim, brief outcomes and implications. The abstract follows 3-4 appropriate keywords. | The abstract contains an appropriate problem statement, aim, brief outcomes and implications. However, any one of the above needs improvements. It follows3-4 appropriate keywords. | The abstract contains an excellent problem statement, aim, brief outcomes and implications. It follows 1-2 appropriatekeywords. | The abstract contains a problem statement, aim, brief outcomes and implications. The abstract follows no keywords. | The abstract contains a problemstatement and aim. Ithas no keywords. | An erroneous abstract. At leastone element is appropriate. | Inappropriate abstract. |
Introduction (Updated as per comments. Changes are marked)
Max marks: 2 | It includes a well-articulated problem statement, the significance of the project and research questions. | It articulated a problem statement, the significance of the project and research questions. However, any one of them requires slight improvement. | It articulated a problem statement, the significance of the project and research questions. However, any two of them requires slightimprovement. | It articulated a problem statement, the significance of the project and research questions. However, two of them require major improvement. | It articulated a problem statement, the significance of the project and research questions. However, all of them require major improvement. | Presents either a problem statement or the project's significance, or research questions which needs improvement. | Presents either a problem statement or the project's significance, or research questions which needs substantial improvement. | Not attempted/ inappropriate. |
Literature review (Updated as per comments. Changes are marked)
Max marks: 2 | Well-synthesised at least 10 articles. The main ideaof each article is conveyed clearly. The synthesis includes how each article is similar andhow they are different. Ask questions included problems/issues that can be resolved. | Well-synthesised at least 10 articles. The main idea of each article is conveyed clearly. The synthesis includes how each article is similar and how they are different. However, a little improvement is required. Ask questions included problems/issues thatcan be resolved needs a slight modification. | Well-synthesised at least 8 articles. The main idea of each article is conveyed clearly. However, the synthesis does not articulate well how each article is similarand different. Ask questions included “problems/issues that can be resolved” needs modifications. | Well-synthesised at least 6 articles. The main idea of each article is conveyed clearly. However, the synthesis does not include how each article is similar and howthey are different. Ask question(s), which included problems/issues that can be resolved needs significant modifications. | Well-synthesised at least 5 articles. The main idea of each article is conveyed clearly. However, the synthesis does not include how each article is similar and how theyare different. The question(s) included problems that cannot be resolved. | Synthesised at least 4articles. The main idea of each article is conveyed. However, the synthesis does not includehow each article is similar and how they are different. The question(s) is/are somewhat relevant to the selected topic. | Synthesised at least 3 articles. The main idea of each article is conveyed. The question(s) is/are unclear. | Not attempted/ inappropriate. |
Aim & Objectives (Updated as per comments. Changes are marked) Max marks: 2 | The aim is clear and concise. All objectives are listed in bullet points and are achievable. | The aim is clear but not concise. All objectives are listed in bullet points and are achievable. | The aim is clear but not concise. All objectives are listed in bullet points, but not all are achievable. | The aim is clear but not concise. Not all objectives are listed in bullet points, and not all are achievable. | Presented both aim and objectives. The aim is neither clear nor concise. All objectives are not achievable. | Presented both aim and objectives. The aim is neither clearnor concise. Unclear objectives. | It is unclear which one is the aim and which are the objectives. | Not attempted/ inappropriate. |
ELEMENTS | EXCELLENT [100%] | EXCELLENT- [87.5%] | GOOD [75%] | GOOD - [62.5%] | SOUND [50%] | SOUND - [37.5%] | SOUND - - [25%] | POOR [0%] |
Methodology
Max marks: 3 | The methodology includes an appropriate flow chart. Each step of the flow chart is described clearly. Relevant theories and equations are well articulated. The schematic diagram is included and explained. | The methodology includes an appropriate flow chart. Each step of the flow chart is described clearly. Relevant theories and equations are well articulated. The schematic diagram is included, but the description needs a slight improvement. | The methodology includes an appropriate flow chart. Each step of the flow chart is described clearly. Relevant theories and equations are well articulated. The schematic diagram and its description need improvement. | The methodology includes an appropriate flow chart. Each step of the flow chart is described clearly. Relevant equations are included, but the theories, the schematic diagram and its description need improvement. | The methodology includes an appropriate flow chart. Each step of the flow chart is described clearly. However, relevant theories, the schematic diagram and its description need improvement. | The methodology includes a flow chart. Each step of the flow chartis described. However, relevant theories, the schematic diagram and its description need improvement. | All subsections need significant improvement. | Inappropriate. |
Risk assessment
Max marks: 3 | The risk assessment is considered appropriate and provided both scores before and afterthe risk assessment. | The risk assessment is considered appropriate and provided both scores before and after the risk assessment. A littlerevision in residual scores is needed. | The risk assessment is considered appropriate and provided both scores before and after the risk assessment. A little revision in both scoresis needed. | The risk assessment is considered appropriate and provided both scores before and after the risk assessment. A significant revision in both scores is needed. | The risk assessment is considered appropriate. | The risk assessment is considered somewhat correct. | The risk assessment needs significant improvement. | The risk assessment is missing or inappropriate. |
Results and discussion
Max marks: 4 | The results are depicted in figures, tables, and diagrams correctly. Excellent interpretation of the resultsbased on the tables, figures, and diagrams presented. Clearly articulate the key findings and explain how the results achieve the objectives. | The results are depicted in figures, tables, and diagrams correctly. Excellent interpretation of the results based on the tables, figures, and diagrams presented. The articulation of the key findings requires a slight improvement. The explanation of how the results achieve the objectives is appropriate. | The results are depicted in figures, tables, and diagrams correctly. Excellent interpretation of the resultsbased on the tables, figures, and diagrams presented. The articulation of the key findings requires improvement. The explanation of how the results achieve the objectives is appropriate. | The results are depicted in figures, tables, and diagrams correctly. Excellent interpretation of the resultsbased on the tables, figures, and diagrams presented. The articulation of the key findings and the explanation of how the results achieve the objectives require improvement. | The results are depicted in figures, tables, and diagrams correctly. Nice interpretation of the results based on the tables, figures, and diagrams presented. The articulation of the key findings and the explanation of how the results achieve the objectives require significant improvement. | The results are depicted in figures, tables, and diagrams. Interpretation of the results based on the tables, figures, and diagrams presented. The articulation of the key findings and the explanation of how the results achieve the objectives require significant improvement. | All subsections of the results and discussions need substantial improvement. | Inappropriate discussion. |
An engagement plan for the First Nations People, including their knowledge and cultural sensitivity
Max marks: 2.5 | The plan is based on the prescribed article. Extensive engagement with First Nation communities is planned. The strategy incorporates protocols and approaches that are culturally suitable, demonstrating a deep understanding of cultural sensitivity. | The plan is based on the prescribed article. The plan mightbe improved by adding more information or refinement in a few minor areas. The cultural sensitivity strategy is excellent; just minor adjustments are required. | The engagement plan is good and uses the prescribed article. It shows that First Nations People’s knowledge and culture are well understood. While cultural sensitivity is well handled, thereare still someobvious shortcomings. | While the engagement plan is generally good, there are some notable gaps in the way that First Nations People's knowledge and culture are integrated. The strategy acknowledges cultural sensitivities to some extent, but it could overlook certain crucial elements. | The plan is based on the prescribed article. While the engagement strategy satisfies the minimum standards, it demonstrates little awareness of First Nation People’s knowledge and culture. There has beenlittle to no in- depth consultation with the First Nations People. Cultural sensitivity needsimprovements. | The engagement strategy is below average, with littleattempt to include the First Nations People’s knowledge and culture and little attention to cultural sensitivity. It seemsthat there is a lack of understanding of the prescribed article. | The engagement strategy is fairlybelow average, withlittle attempt to include the First Nations People’s knowledge and culture and little attention to cultural sensitivity. It is unsure whether the prescribed article has beenconsulted. | Unacceptable/inappropriate. |
Conclusions and recommendations
Max marks: 2 | The conclusion is concise and accurate, with connections made to the aim. Correctly identified the need for the project to proceed after concluding the study. | The conclusion is accurate, with connections made to the aim. Correctly identified the need for the project to proceed after concluding the study. | The conclusions include all significant outcomes but are unrelated to the aim. The recommendations are appropriate. | The conclusions include most of the significant outcomes but are unrelated to the aim. The recommendations are correct. | The conclusions do not cover allsignificant outcomes, but those mentioned are accurate. The recommendations are correct. | The conclusions include a few outcomes, but theyneed improvement. | The included conclusions need significant improvement. | No clear idea about conclusions. |
ELEMENTS | EXCELLENT [100%] | EXCELLENT- [87.5%] | GOOD [75%] | GOOD - [62.5%] | SOUND [50%] | SOUND - [37.5%] | SOUND - - [25%] | POOR [0%] |
Weekly progress
Max marks: 1.5 | Evidence of all weekly meetings in the form of meeting minutes. Dates and times are recorded. All attendees and absentees are listed. A detailed chronological description of all agenda items is recorded. The description also included the next week’s action item. | Evidence of all weekly meetings in the form of meeting minutes. Dates and times are recorded. All attendees and absentees are listed. A detailed chronological description ofall agenda itemsis recorded. The description did not include the next week’s actionitem. | Evidence of all weekly meetings in the form of meeting minutes. Dates and times are recorded. All attendees and absentees are not listed. A detailed chronological description of all agenda items is recorded. The description did not include the nextweek’s action item. | Evidence of 65% of weekly meetings in the form of meeting minutes. Dates and times are recorded. All attendees and absentees are not listed.A detailed chronological description of all agenda items is recorded. The description did not include the next week’s action item. | Evidence of 50% weekly meetings in the form of meeting minutes. Dates and times are recorded. All attendees and absentees are not listed. A detailed chronological description of all agenda items is recorded. The description did not include the nextweek’s action item. |
Evidence of lessthan 50% weeklyattendance will not award any marks. | ||
Language (structure, spelling, punctuation, terminologies) Max marks:2.5 | No errorin English. | Only a few errorsin English. | Several English errors were noticed, but the meaning of the content was not changed. | Multiple or recurring English errors make the report difficult to understand. | Numerous English errors are found in 50% of the elements. | Numerous English errors are found in more than 50% of the elements. | Numerous English errors are found in all elements and need major revisions. Recommended toseek support from ALC. | Unacceptable. |
Referencing
Max marks: 2 | Both in-text citations and the full reference follow the Harvard-CQU style withoutany errors. | Both in-text citations and the reference list follow the Harvard-CQU style with only one error. | Harvard-CQU style followed in-text citations,and the reference list had two formatting errors. | Harvard-CQU style followed in-text citations,and the reference list had three formatting errors. | Harvard-CQU style is not convincingly followed but attempted in-text citation and the reference list. | Attempted, but errorsin in- text citations and the reference list. | Both in-text citations and the full reference follow the Harvard-CQU style without any errors. | Both in-text citations and the reference list follow the Harvard-CQU style with only one error. |
Team contribution table
Max marks: 1.5 | The team followed the template and signed and countersigned by the contributor and the otherteam members. The contribution description is clear and acceptable. The table shows theacceptable contribution percentage. | The team followed the template and signed and countersigned by the contributor and the other team members. The contribution description needs a slight improvement. The table shows theacceptable contribution percentage. | The team followed the template and signed and countersigned by the contributor and the other team members. The contribution description needs improvement. The table shows the acceptable contribution percentage. | The team followed the template and signed only by the contributor. The contribution description needs substantial improvement. The table shows the acceptable contribution percentage. | The team followed the template and signed only by the contributor. Missing the description of the contribution. The table shows the acceptable contribution percentage. | The team followed the template. The signatures and description of the contribution are missing. The table shows the acceptable contribution percentage. | The team did not follow the template. The signatures and description of the contribution are missing. The table shows the acceptable contribution percentage. | Inappropriate and unacceptable. |
ASSESSMENT 2 (PART-2) TEMPLATE
AUSTRALIAN ENGINEERING PRACTICE UNIT CODE: ENEG28001
TERM 2, 2024
NAME OF THE PROJECT TOPIC TEAM MEMBERS NAME AND ID
DATE OF SUBMISSION
SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY, CENTRAL QUEENSLAND UNIVERSITY
Abstract
The abstract should contain
A sample of an abstract of my previously published article:
[NABI, M. N., MINAMI, M., OGAWA, H. & MIYAMOTO, N. 2000. Ultra Low Emission
and High Performance Diesel Combustion with Highly Oxygenated Fuel. SAE Technical Paper Series # 2000-01-0231].
Abstract: “This paper reports on experimental investigation of diesel combustion and exhaust emissions with Fischer-Tropsch (F-T) - biodiesel (BD) blended fuels. F-T fuel was used as a reference fuel for its superior properties to diesel fuel (DF). BD from non-edible jatropha oil was blended with F-T fuel. Using non-edible jatropha oil as a feed-stock, jatropha BD eliminates the food versus fuel conflict. The experimental results showed that exhaust emissions including carbon monoxide (CO), total unburnt hydrocarbon (THC), smoke, total particulate matter (TPM) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx) were reduced with F-T fuel compared to DF. CO, THC, smoke and TPM emissions were reduced significantly, while NOx emissions were somewhat higher with BD blended fuels compared to F-T fuel. The reductions in CO, THC, smoke and TPM emissions with BD blends were mainly due to the oxygen content in the BD blended fuel, while the increases in NOx emissions with BD fuels were due to advance in injection timing, higher percentages of fatty acids with double bonds in the carbon chain and higher heat release in the premixed combustion. Concerning engine performance and emissions, nonedible renewable BD blends can be excellent competitors of alternative fuel for diesel engine”.
Keywords: “Biodiesel, F-T fuel, fuel property, diesel engine and exhaust emissions”.
Auto-generated Table of contents
The table of contents should be auto generated based on the headings and sub-headings in your project report.
A sample of the table of contents
Table of Contents
All tables should be listed numerically. Examples:
Table 1: Specifications of tested fuels. Table 2: Specifications of the tested engine.
All figures should be listed numerically. Examples:
Figure 1: Project location.
Figure 2: Daily electrical load profile.
Figure 3: Model diagram for PV-Hydro-Wind power.
There is no right or incorrect method to acknowledge persons in academic theses; it is entirely up to you whom you choose to recognise. But among the common categories of individuals that writers recognise in their scholarly thesis or writings are as follows:
This section should include
Nomenclature sample
Abbreviations
BSFC Brake specific fuel consumption. IT Indicated torque.
NOx Oxides of nitrogen (nitrogen oxides). NaCl Sodium chloride
Greek letters/symbols
f Equivalence ratio.
l Excess air factor.
|
|
𝐵 Brake thermal efficiency.
𝐷 Density of diesel.
Subscripts B Brake
D Diesel
This is one of the statements that describe the issue which need to be studied. The problem statement's objective is to pinpoint the issue and narrow it down so that it may be thoroughly investigated.
In essence, the project's significance is a written justification for the relevance of the research. It provides support for the need of your study, its influence on your area, its contribution, and the ways in which the reader would profit from it.
Based on your literature review, you have an idea of a research gap. Now, you are able to make a research question. This research question should focus on an issue, and it should be researchable.
The purpose of the literature review is to gain knowledge and information from existing research relevant to your project topic. Also, it is widely accepted that the other purpose of the literature review is to find the research gap between existing research and your selected topic. It is important that you synthesise information from existing literature, how each article is similar and how they are different. This means interpreting the main ideas of each literature. Compare how each article is similar or how they are different. It is also important that you are not allowed to copy the texts of third-party material. You must have to paraphrase the texts and use citations (both in-text and reference lists). For reference, you should use EndNote software, which is free to download on your computer.
The aim should be clear and concise
All objectives should be listed in bullet points.
The methodology includes an appropriate flow chart. Each step of the flow chart should be described clearly. Relevant theories and equations should be included. The schematic diagram should be included and explained. It is recommended that you write the equations using MS WORD equation tools. Diagrams and flow charts can be drawn using MS VISIO or MS PPT, and graphs can be drawn using MS Excel.
Example of an equation using MS Word equation tool:
𝑛
(𝑥 + 𝑎)𝑛 = � �𝑛�𝑥𝑘𝑎𝑛−
------------ (i)
𝑘=0 𝑘
Example of a diagram (you can make it using MS VISIO)
For your project methodology, note the following:
Example of schematic diagram when you work with homer software.
The results should be presented in figures, tables, and diagrams. Interpretation of the results should be based on the tables, figures, and diagrams presented. The results and discussion should clearly articulate the key findings and explain how the results achieve the objectives. You should compare the results with the similar works published earlier. As indicated before, the tables and the graphs can be drawn using MS Excel.
Example of a graph using MS EXCEL
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
Diesel100% Diesel+methanol5% Diesel+methanol10% Diesel+methanol15% Diesel+methanol20%
25 50 75 100
Engine load (% of full load)
Example of a table
Table 1: Specifications of tested fuels:
Fuels Density@15° C [g/cm3]
Diesel100% Diesel+5% methanol Diesel+10% methanol Diesel+15% methanol Diesel+20% methanol
Kinematic viscosity @40°C [mm2/s]
Higher heating value [MJ/kg]
Cetane number [-]
Oxygen content [wt%]
The key components of results and discussion for your team project using HOMER SOFTWARE are (but are not limited to):
The conclusion should be concise and accurate, with connections to the objectives. It is your opportunity to summarise the key findings in the conclusions and recommendations section. The key findings can be listed in bullet points.
The plans you have to advance your research depend on the recommendations you make in your project report. Usually, recommendations can be suggestions for what to do in the future.
Include weekly team meeting minutes. This should include the works done during a week. Any concerns/issues.
Name of the contributor | Description of contributions | Contribution (%) |
Member 1’s Name and ID |
| Based on your contribution to the team’s task, put your reasonable percentage contribution in this column. |
This is the declaration of my contribution to the team project work.
Signature of Member 1 Signatures of other members
Add the necessary rowsbased on thenumber of your team members. |
Appendix
Get original papers written according to your instructions and save time for what matters most.