Table of Contents
|
File Location: Project Management
Team Setup
More information will be included as the project progresses.
A link to the live document is here.
Team Values and Norms
PunctualEach team member will be prompt and arrive at the team meetings on time. If an unexpected conflict comes up, the absent team member will notify at least one team-mate prior to the expected absence. An absent team-member should confirm that a team-mate has received their message (in person, voice mail, email, etc).
Thorough
Each team member will complete their tasks thoroughly and completely, so that the work does not have to be re-done by a peer on the team. If a member does not know how to complete a task, feels overwhelmed, or needs assistance then the member notifies peers, and seeks assistance either from a peer, the faculty guide, a faculty consultant, or another person.
Accurate
Each team member completes their work accurately and in a way that can be easily checked for accuracy by peers and the faculty guide. All work is fully documented and easy to follow.
Professional and Ethical
Each team member gives credit where credit is due. All work completed includes citations to appropriate literature, or sources of assistance. If a team member has gotten assistance from a publication or individual, then that assistance or guidance is fully documented in the reports prepared. Each team member is honest and trustworthy in their dealings with their peers.
Committed
Each team member will contribute an equal share to the success of the project.
Team Members
Value | Unsatisfactory | Needs Improvement | Meets Expectations | Exceeds Expectations |
---|---|---|---|---|
Punctual | The team member has had one or more unexcused absences or tardy arrivals to a scheduled team activity. The team member is not notifying others of conflicts with meeting times, or has allowed other committments to impede the member's duties to this team. The team member is detracting from the performance of the entire team. | The team member has had one or more unexcused absences or tardy arrivals. The individual could and should have done a better job at notifying (in advance) a peer of the absence or tradiness. At the current time, the problem has not caused significant harm to the team, but this behavior needs to improve. It is not unusual for a team member to receive this rating a couple of times during the project. | The team member was prompt and present at every team event this week, or any absences were excused in advance. If there was an unexcused absence or tardiness, then the team-mates agreed that the reason disclosed after the fact was indeed unavoidable. For example, a member is in a fender bender on the way to campus, and was unable to contact a team-mate about being late. The absent member caught up with a peer as soon as practical, and informed them of the problem. | Not only is the team member always prompt and present, but the member clearly plans ahead for excused absences (such as job trips) and insures that the absence will not adversely affect the team's performance. The member notifies the team of heavy loads and external conflicts (such as exams in other classes) that COULD have an adverse impact on the team, and works with the peers on this team to make sure that the information flow from the member to and from the peers is smooth even in such cases. |
Value | Unsatisfactory | Needs Improvement | Meets Expectations | Exceeds Expectations |
---|---|---|---|---|
Thorough | The team member has not completed the task assigned, or has submitted a response that is clearly insufficient. The work will need to be re-done by another team member in order for the team to move forward. Some of the work may have been done, but it was incomplete. The team member is detracting from the performance of the entire team. | The team member made some progress towards the task assigned, but not as much progress as should have been accomplished. The work may be done, but the other team member's have no way of checking the results, because the supporting documentation is incomplete. The team member is getting behind on the tasks that need to be completed. The team member needs to make up the missed work during the next evaluation period. | The team member has made solid progress towards the task assigned. The task is complete, and is well done, though it may need some additional work and refinement to be fully complete. The assignment may be incomplete, but the team member has clearly made a good effort towards getting the task done. In retrospect, this task may have been too much for the member to do in the time allocated, so the fact that the task is not done yet is not due to lack of effort by the member. | The task has been completed fully, and is in essentially finished form. The other team members can readily check the work submitted since the documentation is so clear. Not only is the work done, but everyone on the team recognizes that the task is complete with little or no need for additional effort. |
Value | Unsatisfactory | Needs Improvement | Meets Expectations | Exceeds Expectations |
---|---|---|---|---|
Accurate | The work completed by the team member is unacceptable and does not meet the basic standards of engineering work. Engineering principles were not applied, or were grossly mis-applied. Basic elements of the engineering task were overlooked. The work completed must be re-done completely. | The work completed by the member contains many errors that must be corrected. While the basic approach to problem solving may be ok, the actual work completed needs to be largely re-done in order to be useful to the team. Some things were not done by the team member, that should have been obvious to complete. | The work completed by the member contains a few errors that must be corrected. The basic approach to problem solving is good, and the errors are relatively minor and could be readily corrected through normal peer review and checking. The work was corrected through consultation with the team members or faculty guide. | The team member completed the task with virtually no errors or omissions. The work was accurate, and can be easily scaled to other applications or tasks that the team may encounter. |
Value | Unsatisfactory | Needs Improvement | Meets Expectations | Exceeds Expectations |
---|---|---|---|---|
Professional and Ethical | The team member has committed plagiarism, falsified data, ignored their responsibility as an engineer. The team member may have behaved inappropriately at a team event, or in a manner that reflects adversely on the team. The members' actions may cause the entire team to fail. | The team member has overlooked some references or consistently fails to cite sources and conduct individual tasks. The team member may have made some off-color remarks or been offensive to a team-mate or other individual. The team member needs to clean up his/her act. | The team member behaves responsibly and fully documents sources and collaborators on all work. | The team member is a role model for others, and behaves in a professional and ethical fashion even under very trying and difficult circumstances. |
Value | Unsatisfactory | Needs Improvement | Meets Expectations | Exceeds Expectations |
---|---|---|---|---|
Committed | The team member is a burden to the rest of the team. | The team member is carrying less than their fair share of the work load. | The team member is carrying their fair share of the workload. | The team member is carrying more than their fair share of the workload. |
Project Plans & Schedules
To View full Gantt chart, go to the live document below photo.
A link to the live document is here.
Risk Assessment and Growth Curves
Click on photo to zoom in and read the PDF.
A link to the live document is here.
Other Team Resources
Your team may have other resource requirements. With your customer and guide, your team should identify:- Planned meeting space (default is MSD Design Center)
- Planned build & test space (e.g., Design Center, EE Senior Design Lab, CE Projects Lab, ME Machine Shop, Brinkman Lab, other faculty lab on campus, onsite at customer location, etc.)
- Any RIT or customer safety training required to use
the space.
- RIT Training may include, for example: lab/studio safety, fire safety, laser safety, hazardous waste management, radiation safety, gas cylinder training, shop safety
- Full list of available RIT courses is available here. If you have an external customer, they may require additional training.
Meeting Minutes, Notes, & Actions
Customer Interview #1 Aug 29, 2016 Duration: 0:45
Present:
- William Hollomon
- Koby Kubrin
- Albert Lin
- Sarah Brownell
- Colin McGlynn
Interview Questions:
What will be the scale of the rope making operation?
What level of tooling complexity will be required?
What are the environmental, social and infrastructure conditions in the field?
What type of packaging size constraint are we operating within?
What quantity of machines are to be distributed within the given time period?
What quality (strength, cleanliness, material properties etc.) constraints are being imposed?
Who will be the operator of the machines?
What applications do you anticipate the rope being used for?
What will be the economic benefit of selling a rope product over recycling the bottles?
How does the requirement that 'only 15% of materials can be imported' pertain to the design?
What is the most common type of bottle design in Haiti?
Notes:
- Mainly kids who are collecting the plastic bottles
- Important to create a product which can be brought to market
- Uses include tying things to vehicles, boat construction, scaffolding, artwork etc.
- NGOs or small businesses will operate the product
- Simpler is better, can be scaled up for the future
- Important to keep an eye on cost
- 2 types of (main) plastic bottles in Haiti
- Corporate philanthropy is encouraged
- Must walk a social political line
- Engineering specifications are to act as a 'guide' - must determine optimal product conditions
- Opportunity to export product and distribute internationally
- Package must be able to be transported by 2-3 people
Outcome: Defined customer requirements, helped to determine social, economic and environmental parameters surrounding the execution of the project. Developed engineering requirement concepts
Team Meeting #1 Sept 5, 2016 Duration: 1:30
Present:
- William Hollomon
- Colin McGlynn
- Jordan Reynolds
Outcome:
- Finished engineering and customer requirements
- Developed Microsoft Project Gantt Chart
- Updated 'Problem Definition' EDGE page
- Started Problem Definition Review Powerpoint
Customer Interview #2 Sept 6, 2016 Duration: 0:30
Present:
- William Hollomon
- Colin McGlynn
- Albert Lin
- Koby Kurbin
Outcome:
- Available Resources: Imported plastic bottles (coke, sprite,etc.)
- Available Labor/Fabrication: masons, carpenters, welding, boat maker
- Agriculture Use
- Enterprise owned (small businesses)
- start small (look for employment)
- They make ropes out of rice sacks
- Uses: tying up animals, tying down boats, marine applications, etc.
- private uses? possibilities for selling rope
- rope costs...
- Available energy sources: generator, electricity running to homes/businesses
- recycling: 250 gourdes (3.85 US$)/bag of bottles
- environmental effects to worry about: water (fish ecosystem), standing water (mosquito related diseases)
- kids: can't sell bottles all the time, sit on side of the roads and wait for buyers
- weather conditions: tropical, sunny, hurricane season similar to Florida, occasional floods
- Main priority: GET RID OF THE PLASTIC BOTTLES
Team Meeting #2 Sept 7, 2016 Duration: 3:00
Present:
- William Hollomon
- Colin McGlynn
- Albert Lin
- Koby Kurbin
- Jordan Reynolds
Priorities: Problem Definition Review for Thursday
Outcomes:
- Gantt chart - 50-60 tasks (at least in depth for next phase)
- 3 week individual tasks
- Peer Review slide - remove
- No notes - move to tables in .ppt
- CR, ER - 1,3,9 grading format
- Everything in ER needs to be testable and measure-able
- In ER -> cost and overall weight/size
- DC3 and 4 in ER????
- Every CR needs at least 1 ER - in HOQ
- Constraints - have no control over
- Clean up Constraints in .ppt
- Finish Risk Assessment and House of Quality
- .ppt due by Thursday 09/08/2016 by 5pm (emailed)
Peer Reviews
Week 3 Peer Reviews | |
---|---|
William Hollomon | William's Peer Review Document WilliamPeerReview.docx. |
Yi Po (Albert) Lin | Albert's Peer Review Document AlbertPeerReview.docx. |
Koby Kubrin | Koby's Peer Review Document KobyPeerReview.docx. |
Jordan Reynolds | Jordan's Peer Review Document JordanPeerReview.docx. |
Colin McGlynn | Colin's Peer Review Document ColinPeerReview.docx. |
Communication
- Establish customer point of contact
- Establish preferred method of communication
- Establish expected frequency of communication
- Determine customer availability for each of the 5 reviews
- Identify a team member to handle customer
communication
- Establish team expectations for cc on customer emails
- Set expectations for ho/when pre-read documentation will be shared with customer
- Establish expectations for within-team communication
- Establish preferred method of communication
- Establish expectations for how/when to include guide in communication
- Establish team expectations for cc on within-team messages
Project Reviews
Preparation, notes and actions, etc. Refer to Gate Reviews page, as well.Table of Contents
MSD I & II | MSD I | MSD II |
---|---|---|
Integrated System Build & Test |