|Email Address||Phone Number|
|1st Choice Project|
|2nd Choice Project|
|3rd Choice Project|
Others you would prefer to work with:
Special Skills (e.g, autocad, machining, etc.):
Any Special Reason for 1st Choice Selection:
Project: Baxter--heart valve crimping mechanism
Date: January 18, 1995
Time: 9:30 AM
Place: ELH 110
Once you have an array of solutions that (hopefully) span the space of possible approaches to solving the problem, it is time to select those solutions that have the highest potential for success. The most promising should be pursued in earnest, and perhaps combination can be fashioned from them.
The process of selecting the most promising solutions is as important as the outcome. This is because the process of identifying the strengths and weaknesses of the solutions leads to a dialogue that clarifies the points of the solutions that may have been taken for granted. The discussion also identifies where features have been miscommunicated and where the group members are not fully informed.
There are several methods for formally ranking the most viable solutions. Any of these is OK. We prefer the Pugh chart style of ranking, where only coarse separations are identified between options. It is not fruitful at this stage to make fine distinctions because we do not have enough information (in general) to do so accurately.
The Pugh chart is constructed by listing the options on one axis and the important features (from the specification sheet, for example) on the other. Then choose an option that seems pretty good and assign a 1 to each feature. Then rank each of the other options relative to the baseline option. During the ranking process, the discussion will help clarify the features of the options. Then sum the total scores. The clear winners (if they exist) are those options to pursue. The options can also be combined. If all are approximately equal, then you cannot eliminate any choices at this stage.
An example Pugh chart is shown below.
There are several features of the design review presentation that are critical. Remember, the presentation is to provide an opportunity for attendance by others interested both in the activities of the UCI team and the results of the design effort. The presentation is to convey your understanding of the goal, the issues, the alternatives and the possible outcomes. At the conclusion of the presentation the UCI faculty and consultants will work with you to define the direction of the remainder of the course. The quality of this exercise will depend directly on the quality of the presentation.
Plan the presentation for 30 minutes. A slow start, questions, and general discussion can expand this rapidly to an hour. Plan 1.5 minutes per transparency, which means a maximum 20 transparencies form the main talk. Specific test data or calculations should be prepared and held aside to be used if questions arise. Presentations should be concise, focusing on the highlights of your findings.
Use this outline as a guide:
The final presentation has two important purposes. First, it summarizes the project goal and your activities toward achieving the goal for those in the audience who are not familiar with the problem. Second, it presents a clear recommendation or design to the company sponsor. As with the midterm presentation, all group members should participate in the final presentation of the project.
Each presentation will be allotted 30 minutes, including questions from the audience. There will be plenty of time after all of the presentations to follow up on questions that are not addressed in the formal presentation time. With only 30 minutes, clear and concise presentation of the critical features is necessary. Your overheads (or slides) should include the following:
Remember to leave time for questions.