| The University of Sheffield Department of Mechanical Engineering |
MEC445 Industrial Applications of Finite Element Analysis Feedback form
Project report
| Poor (<50%) | Adequate (50-59%) | Good (60-69%) | Excellent (>70%) | |
| Analysis approach and model construction (30%) | Limited description of model conceptualisation and development, Borderline understanding of analysis methods. | Adequate model conceptualisation but flawed construction with mesh issues. Limited description and justification of solution methods and parameters used. | Good model conceptualisation and overall construction, but with some flaws. Reasonable description of solution methods and parameters used but lack of justification. | Excellent model conceptualisation, mesh strategy, boundary conditions, etc. Demonstration of in-depth understanding of solution methods and parameters used. |
| ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | |
| Modelling results, verification and validation (30%) | Poor modelling results. Very limited mesh refinement. Obvious validation issues. | Adequate results but with obvious issues. Limited demonstration of convergence study. Some validation issues. | Good overall results but with some flaws. Reasonable demonstration of convergence study. Reasonable results validation with few issues. | Excellent mesh independent results. Clear demonstration of convergence study. Excellent validation of modelling results. |
| ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | |
| Assessment, interpretation and discussion of results (30%) | Minimal assessment and interpretation of results. Lack of discussion about solving the industrial problem. | Limited assessment of results, some demonstration of understanding of possible reasons for discrepancies. Limited discussion about solving the industrial problem. | Some critical assessment of results though not without flaws, reasonable understanding of possible reasons for discrepancies. Reasonable discussion about solving the industrial problem. | Logical, correct and critical assessment of results, demonstrated clear understanding of both results and possible discrepancies. Clear understanding of using the model to solve the industrial problem. |
| ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | |
| Report quality and writing style (10%) | Poor presentation of report, no obvious structure, difficult to read. Poor spelling and grammar. | Good presentation style; clearly laid out and formatted. Good spelling and grammar. | Very good readable style; clearly laid out and formatted. Good spelling and grammar. Figures presented adequately and referenced to present the information. | Excellent presentation style. Clear structure, well laid out and formatted. Good spelling and grammar. Figures very well presented. |
| ☐ | ☐ | ☐ | ☐ |
Registration Number: Overall Mark:
| Further comments |