P17221: FSAE Composite Tube Fabrication/public/
Table of Contents
MSD I Self Evaluations
Design Review Feedback
Phase 3 FeedbackThe feedback below is from Gary.
- Great job flowing requirements from the PRP to the ER's. Now, condense it to fit one page (at a readable pica) and you've got a great chart.
- You refer to "minimal" costs. This is Engineering: what are the costs and how does align with your budget?
- How do you set and insure tension is maintained - it looks very process intensive, especially for the user. This means trial and error which will cost the formula team time and money. Can this be improved? If so, how?
- Add predicted values and actual values to your ER chart (obviously, you can only add "actual" when you test).
- How will the operator control chatter?
- Your WBS is still lacking and your teams' performance against plan is an unknown. I suggest you pay attention to these for the next review.
Phase 2 FeedbackFormal feedback held in a meeting with Gary and Dr. DeBartolo. In general:
- We failed to follow the design process as intended. We broke our design down into subsystems one design phase too early.
- We failed to obtain SME feedback for work done during this phase.
- We failed to complete peer reviews for this phase.
Phase 1 FeedbackThe feedback below is from Gary.
- Your WBS is really a subsystem breakdown, not a Work Breakdown - you may find my tuesday workshop on WBS's useful
- state your team role during introductions
- add a key so your CR ratings can be understood
- Your schedule needs to be actionable... that means all tasks are linked, each task has accountibility and duration (which should not exceed 1 week) and the sum of all individual plans should = Gantt chart. Btw, all academic actions identified in mycourses should be reflected as tasks (eg: functional decomp) as should be all risk mitigations.
- I am uncomfortable with your conflict resolution
process. I offer the following for your consideration:
- the two parties in conflict discuss privately and try to understand root cause & corrective action. Failing that
- the parties discuss at a team meeting and get the whole team to help id a solution. Failing that
- get the guide involved.
- Your process (over simplified) says the PM dictates a solution which all must follow. Long term this can kill a team's performance.
|Admin||Mechanical Design||Electrical Design||Assembly/Integration||Documentation|