Advanced Design Report Marking Scheme (2018-19)
Report ID: xxxx (Please key in the Report ID in the blue
EAC PO Criteria
Identification and
formulation of problem
statement
PO2: Problem Analysis
Analysis of complex
engineering problem and
reaching substantiated
conclusions
Quality of design solutions
PO3 -
Design/Development of
solutions Difficulty level and
complexity of design
solutions
Proper selection and
application of modern
engineering and IT tools
PO5: Modern Tool Usage
Excellent 90-100
The problem statement is clearly identified
and formulated using relevant literature. The
objectives of the design exercise are clearly
described. The benefits of the design task ie
how the overall process/technology/product
is improved by the design task being
completed is well explained.
The design problem and solution are critically
analysed. There is clear evidence of reaching
substantiated conclusions using first principles
of mathematics and engineering sciences.
Design tasks were carried out to perfection,
there are no procedural, logical, mathematical
or other errors; all assumptions are correct,
reasonable and appropriate; the data used is
of the highest quality and its selection well
documented. Alternative pathways were
explored and it is explained why the chosen
approach was adopted.
The difficulty level is at the top end of
chemical engineering; even by advanced
standards the tasks undertaken were
exceptionally difficult and complex. It is a real
niche topic showing high level abstract
thinking, originality in analysis to formulate
suitable models/system/process/product.
Proper and excellent usage of engineering
software/tools such as AutoCAD, Visio, Hysys,
Matlab, Simulink, Comsol, Fluent, Excel, etc to
solve design problem. Excellent understanding
of modern tools usage demonstrated e.g.
limitations of software, underlying
assumptions etc.
 Effective communication
through high quality written
report and design
documentation
PO10: Communication
The report is written virtually free of any
language errors, in an appropriate style and is
perfectly consistent. It is well structured and
laid out, and follows a logical progression. The
length is appropriate for the content
conveyed. Data and graphics are presented in
the most efficient and attractive way, and are
helpful and easy to use. References are used
where necessary, and they are added in an
appropriate and consistent style. The overall
appearance is professional, reflecting much
thought and effort.
rt ID in the blue cell)
Very good 70-89
The problem statement and objectives are
identified clearly and related for the most
part; more use of relevant literature could
have been made in problem formulation.
The benefits of the design task are explained
well leaving few doubts or questions.
The design problem and solution are
critically analysed. There is clear evidence of
reaching substantiated conclusions using first
principles of mathematics and engineering
sciences, but one or two aspects could have
been better analysed or explained.
Design tasks were carried out well, there are
only minor errors; all assumptions are
correct, reasonable and appropriate; the
data used is of the good quality and its
selection documented; the chosen approach
is explained with some reference to other
possibilities.
The design is clearly of an advanced nature,
ie at a difficulty and complexity level is at the
high end of chemical engineering; It is a
typical advanced topic showing high level
abstract thinking, originality in analysis to
formulate suitable
models/system/process/product.
Very good usage of engineering
software/tool to solve design problem with
very minor errors. Very good understanding
of the usefulness of software/tool in
designing project solution.
Good 60-69
The problem statement and objectives are
identified and related to some extent, with
omissions and some discrepancy. The
benefits of the design task are explained well
and it is clear what advantages the work
aimed to achieve.
Analysis of the design problem and solution
is present, but lacks critical thinking in one or
two aspects. The link between conclusions or
design outputs and work carried out is clear.
There are some errors evident in the design,
and the work does not give an impression of
completeness; some of the assumptions and
data could be disputed, but the work is still
credible and could be further improved.
The design is of an advanced nature but with
a few routine, standard design approach.
There is reasonable evidence of abstract
thinking, originality in analysis to formulate
suitable models/system/process/product.
Good usage of engineering software/tool to
solve design problem with some evident
errors. Good understanding of the usefulness
of software/tool in designing project
solution.
There are a few minor errors in language,
style and consistency, but they do not
detract from the overall professional
appearance. Data and graphics are used to
good effect and essentially the report is well
structured and progresses logically.
References are mostly used correctly and the
length is reasonably for the content though a
few additions or omissions might have
improved the report.
There are some minor errors in language,
style and consistency, but they do not
detract from the overall understanding. Data
and graphics are used to reasonable effect
and essentially the report is reasonably
structured and progresses logically.
References are generally used correctly. The
report is slightly longer or shorter than
necessary.
 Satisfactory 40-59 Poor <40 Weight
The problem statement and objectives are The problem statement and objectives are
identified adequately, and related to some not set, very vague or bear little relation to
extent, with omissions and some what was undertaken and achieved. It is
discrepancy. The benefits are not well unclear how the overall
1
explained and it is not entirely clear what process/technology/product benefits from
advantages the work aimed to achieve. the design task.

There is some evidence that the design Minimal or no evidence of critical analysis in
problem and solution are analysed, but lacks design project. Conclusions or design outputs
critical thinking in many aspects. It is not are not supported by the work carried out.
entirely clear how conclusions or design 2
outputs are supported by the work carried
out.

There are many errors evident in the design,
and the work needs improvement; some of
the assumptions and data could be disputed,
but the work is still credible and could be
improved substantially.
The design is flawed, and there are
substantial errors that undermine the
credibility of the approach, selection and
assumptions; the approach is incorrect and a
different approach would need to be 3
adopted to succeed in the design task.

The design is of a standard level with routine
design approach with minor complexity.
There is little evidence of abstract thinking,
originality in analysis to formulate suitable
models/system/process/product.
The design has no complexity with routine
calculation in all aspects. There is no
evidence of abstract thinking, originality in
analysis to formulate suitable
2
models/system/process/product.

Average usage of engineering software/tool Minimal usage or no evidence of any

to solve design problem with many evident engineering software or modern tool usage
errors. Some understanding of the in design project.
usefulness of software/tool in designing
0.5
project solution is demonstrated.
There are some major errors in language,
style and consistency, with slight detraction
from the overall understanding. Data and
graphics do not provide reasonable effect
and sufficient information, the report is
reasonably structured and progresses
logically. References have some errors. The
report is slightly longer or shorter than
necessary.
There are major errors in language, style and
consistency which makes the report hard to
understand. Data and graphics have major
flaws. The report is unstructured and does
not progress logically. References have
substantial errors or there are no references
at all. The report is too long or too short.
1.5
10
Score Total
Comments:

0
0