Engineering Problem Solving Principles - Assignment Example

Unit Title: Engineering Problem Solving Principles Unit Number: 3. Qualification: _ Engineering. Assignment Title: TEAM REPORT Assignment No: 3. Date: ------------ Tutor name: ---- Student Name: Table of Contents 1.EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3 2.INTRODUCTION 3 3.RESULTS AND ANALYSIS 4 PART A 4 PART B 8 6. Part B1 – Statistical Analysis and Generic Factors 8 Investigation of Generic Factors 10 Part B2 - Civil Engineering (Option 1) 10 Geotechnical Consideration 10 Geological and Land based Features 12 Part B3 - Electrical Engineering (Option 2) 13 Part B4 - Mechanical Engineering (Option 3) 16 Various water and waste pumps 16 The Types of Pipes 17 Fluid Properties 18 PART C 19 7. Part C: Details of Proposed Solution and one (1) Engineering Specification 19 Part C1 – Overall Viability of the Solution 19 Part C2 - Civil and Structural Engineering Specifications (Option 1) 20 Part C3 - Electrical Engineering Specifications (Option 2) 21 Part C4 – Mechanical Engineering Specifications (Option 3) 23 Part C5 – Construction and Maintenance Specifications 25 CONCLUSION 27 RECOMMENDATIONS 27 REFERENCES 28 APPENDICES 29 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This is a team report assignment that entails details of a project design specification and analysis for different sites. The viability of the different sites for construction is tested and analysed then a specific site chosen using a decision matrix as will be discussed in the report. The report is divided into three main parts as follows: Part A: Site selection using a reliable decision matrix tool including additional statistical analysis. Part B: Analysis of identified statistical and engineering factors for selected site (Statistical, and one of disciplinary areas). Part C: Details of proposed problem solutions (Overall, Construction/Maintenance, and one of disciplinary). 2. INTRODUCTION For any project to be set up, there must be considerations put in place siting the various reasons and justification of putting the particular project in place. These are specifications and guidelines to enable the sustainability of the project and to avoid loss of life for example by collapse of structures. Engineering principles come in handy in this area. The main areas of discipline considered in this report will be: 1. Civil engineering 2. Electrical engineering 3. Mechanical engineering The project management stage begins with setting up a team that will carry out and deliver the solution to the project establishment. This team is given the task of collecting first of all data about the viable project construction site. Weather and or climatic conditions are a major player in this area. Some of the weather conditions or factors are for example: 1. Rainfall 2. Cloud cover 3. Temperature and 4. Wind These factors play a vital role because for example they will give a go ahead in terms of determining an alternative source of power for a given area. Some of the data will also help in project planning and management by deciding the time where construction will be mostly carried out or where the concentration of activities takes place. Weather factors also give us prior knowledge of what to expect while constructing a given project. It even gets better with the fact that where presented with numerous sources of data about a given area, we are able to compare and contrast then choose the best like we did in this assignment. 3. RESULTS AND ANALYSIS PART A Decision Matrix   Access (5) Rainfall (4) Condition viability for renewable energy total total with multipliers Barbican         0   Mt William 4 3.9 5 124.2 137.1 164.8 Hamad IA2 part B selected site  1 2.3 5 106 112  134.4 Lake Wartook 4 2.8 5 101.2 113 137.4 Pohlner 5 2.53 5 47.28 59.81 87.4 scale   Daily average for 2016 (actual value)     Daily wind speed average for 2016 (actual value) multiply by oaktas scale as shown below   1 No vehicle access and difficult walk   1 undisturb   1: 7 - 8 Oktas   2 No vehicle access but easy walk 2: 5 - 6 Oktas   3 Only accessible by small atv 3: 3 - 4 Oktas   4 Rough road accessible by 4WD 4: 1 - 2 Oktas   5 well maintained road   5 Disturb   5: 0 Oktas Fig-1 Decision matrix Part A: Site Selection and Statistical Analysis 1. T-test sites Mean rainfall, X Mean from Graph, Y X-Y X-Y^2 Mt. Rosea 2.3 2.5 0.2 0.04 Barbican Rocks 3 3.1 0.1 0.1 Mt. William 3.9 4.2 0.3 0.09 SUM 0.6 0.23 Fig-2 T-test compares the mean of two factors: i. An independent Sample t-test compares mean for two groups while, ii. A paired sample t-test compares mean from the same group at different times say for example one year apart. Null hypothesis is that there is a difference between the mean rainfall values. Degrees of freedom,3-1=2, From the t table t=0.81647, at an alpha level of 5% The t value from the t table less than the calculated t value, therefore we reject the null hypothesis that there is a difference in the rainfall means. Therefore we conclude that the mean rainfall values are closely distributed and that the different methods we employed to calculate and establish these values are correct. In other words we are ascertaining the results as true and reliable. Rainfall distribution in this area can be termed closely related since that areas are close to each other physically and experience nearly same weather conditions. 2. CHI- SQUARED TEST Mt. Wartook Mt. Rosea Barbican Rocks Total Total Rain 228 228 228 684 2 No Rain 137 137 137 411 Total 365 365 365 1095 Fig-3 Out of the 365 days in a year, we take the number of rain days, and the days there was no rain for the three sites. The null hypothesis is that the number of rainy days observed is different from what is expected. The tabular data is as above. We create a new table with the observed and expected values. These calculations are under the assumption that the hypothesis is independent. For Lake Wartook for example, the expected number of rainy days will be 228*684/1095=143 days. Observed values Expected values Cell Total Mt. Wartook 228 228 0 0 Mt. Rosea 228 228 0 Barbican Rocks 228 228 0 Fig-4 The sum of the cell values is 0 Read More

2. CHI- SQUARED TEST Mt. Wartook Mt. Rosea Barbican Rocks Total Total Rain 228 228 228 684 2 No Rain 137 137 137 411 Total 365 365 365 1095 Fig-3 Out of the 365 days in a year, we take the number of rain days, and the days there was no rain for the three sites. The null hypothesis is that the number of rainy days observed is different from what is expected. The tabular data is as above. We create a new table with the observed and expected values. These calculations are under the assumption that the hypothesis is independent.

For Lake Wartook for example, the expected number of rainy days will be 228*684/1095=143 days. Observed values Expected values Cell Total Mt. Wartook 228 228 0 0 Mt. Rosea 228 228 0 Barbican Rocks 228 228 0 Fig-4 The sum of the cell values is 0

Read More