Advanced Mechanical

Design and
Manufacturing
Engineering
7ME500

CW Assessment Brief
Jilin Ye
Module Leader
• Dr Jilin Ye
• Email: [email protected]
• Tel: 01332 59 3582

Key Dates and Details

Assessment Detail Assessment Information
Assessment Type: Individual Report
Assessment Weighting: 50%
Word count/Length: 3,000 words (± 10% tolerance)
Learning Outcomes: 1, 2
Submission Method: Turnitin
Submission Date: 12:00 Noon UK time, 08/05/2025
Provisional Feedback Release Date: 09:00 UK time, 29/05/2025

Description of the Assessment

An integrated design, material selection and manufacturing approach provides one of key enabling
capabilities needed in effectively evaluating specific areas of initial concept development and in
performing detail engineering design and analysis throughout a product development cycle. This
assessment with examine the integrated engineering approach which incorporates the infrastructure
and design and analysis formats and tools that can be exercised in a concurrent nature and provides
benefits from a standpoint of producing a better design, optimised results, lower cost and reduced
risk.

Relationship to Programme Assessment Strategy

This assessment has been designed to enable students to apply fundamental knowledge of mechanical
design, analysis, simulation, optimisation and manufacturing technologies learned from classes to a
case study practice at a postgraduate level. This assignment has been also provided students a good
example to solve any engineering problems in an industry-based context.

2
Attributes and Skills
There is a vast number of resources available for students on the internet and university library. Below
are some links to helpful resources. Some are taken from the Develop@Derby site which is
recommended you visit.

Skills Links to useful resources

☐ Critical thinking https://libguides.derby.ac.uk/critical-reading

☐ Communication Communication Skills for Engineers – The Seven Deadly Sins and
How to Overcome Them - Engineering.com

☐ Collaboration https://libguides.derby.ac.uk/group-work

☐ Creative problem solving Creative Problem Solving - Finding Innovative Solutions to

Challenges (mindtools.com)

☐ Self-direction & planning https://libguides.derby.ac.uk/preparing-for-study

☐ Numeracy, statistics & https://libguides.derby.ac.uk/maths-and-numeracy

financial literacy

☐ Digital https://libguides.derby.ac.uk/digital-skills

☐ Resilience How to Be Mentally Strong: 14 Ways to Build Mental Toughness

(positivepsychology.com)

☐ Adaptability Adaptability v resilience – and how to nurture it | THE Campus

Learn, Share, Connect (timeshighereducation.com)

☐ Leadership & future Top 10 Leadership Skills for the Future of Work - Harvard
thinking Business Publishing

3
Assessment Content
The connecting rod in an internal combustion engine has the primary role of turning the reciprocating
motion of the piston into rotational motion that the crankshaft can then output as work. The
connecting rod is made of: the small end which connects to the piston head via a pin, the big end
which connects to the crankshaft via a rod cap and slip bearing, and the shank or I-section that
connects the two ends respectively as shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Diagram of a Connecting Rod

The connecting rod is a critical component of an internal combustion engine that undergoes a variety
of repeated tensile/compressive loads along with inertial forces created by its rotating motion.
In this coursework, a Yamaha motorcycle engine will be investigated as an example (see the attached
Yamaha Engine Manual). The primary task is to critically analyse the workloads, justify suitable
material and optimise the design structure of the connecting rod. Table 1 below is the specifications
of engine parameters and workload conditions of a Yamaha motorcycle engine.
Based on the above Description of the Assessment and additional supporting materials provided (in
the Assignment Support Materials folder on Blackboard), you are required to carry out the following
work:
1) Design/model the connecting rod using the provided information by the SolidWorks CAD
package
2) Analytically calculate the workloads, compressive and tension stresses that the connecting rod
endured during operation
3) Use ANSYS Granta Materials Selection Software (previously Cambridge Engineering Selector -
CES) to select and justify one suitable material for the connecting rod based on minimum cost
and maximum fatigue strength
4) Present material fatigue analysis results in form of plot and/or tables based upon one million
(106) fatigue cycle

4
5) Conduct an FEA simulation covering mesh-independent test and static test in both tension and
compression loads
6) Optimise/improve the design structure of the connection rod based upon the simulation results
7) Produce the final connection rod using any available Additive Manufacturing (AM) facilities
8) Critical comparisons, evaluations, discussions/recommendations for improvements
9) Deliver a PPT presentation to report the work (15 minutes/student)

Table 1: Engine Parameters and Loading Conditions

Parameter Name Symbol Value Units

Single cylinder volume V 249.5 cc

Engine power P 148.8 @10,000 rpm HP

Output torque T 108 @7,750 rpm Nm

Engine speed RPM 8,000 to 11,000 rpm

Maximum combustion pressure MCP 18,500 kPa

Stroke S 0.058 m

Connecting rod length l 0.1131 m

Cylinder bore d 0.074 m

Crank radius r 0.029 m

Average connecting rod area Ac 1.205 × 10-4 m2

Mass of piston head mpiston 0.199 kg

Mass of gudgeon pin mg-pin 0.049 kg

Submission Requirements
The assignment must be delivered in a form of report using the standard Harvard citing and
referencing style (3,000 words plus ± 10% tolerance, excluding the Cover Page, Table of Contents,
Figures, Tables/Graphics, References/Bibliography and/or Appendices, etc.). Your report must be
submitted in an electronic form through an online Turnitin submission point on Blackboard.
You are also requested to upload your original CAD modelling, static FEA simulation files to the
assignment folder “CAD modelling, FEA simulation and PPT presentation files” in this Module Teams
Space under individual channels by the submission deadline. Your PPT files are uploaded to the same
folder after your presentation assessment.

5
Marking Criteria
Marking Criteria Mark Allocation
Structure and Presentation: Layout, language, references and formatting 10%
Evidence of Research: Depth of understanding of theory including 20%
evidence of wider reading and relevance of sources
Development and Implementation: Use of appropriate techniques and 30%
methodology to validate the final work
Analysis, Evaluation and Interpretation: Result appraisal, resolution, 30%
comparison, justification and elaboration
Summary and Conclusions: Synthesis of achievements and/or findings 10%
and identification of improvements and/or future work

Assessment Rubric
The assessment rubric on the next 2 pages shows the complete criteria of the CW and how you will be
assessed.

6
Criteria Very Poor (Fail) Unsatisfactory (Marginal Fail) Good/Satisfactory (Pass) Very Good (Merit) Excellent (Distinction)

Level
Below 39% 40-49% 50-59% 60-69% 70-100%

Structure and Presentation: Inadequate structure with no One or more of the following Appropriate structure, fair Coherent structure, enough Highly coherent structure with
sense of logical argument. Many applies. Weak or indistinct synthesis but a mechanical synthesis of sources to enable excellent synthesis of sources. No
Layout, language, references and
errors in spelling, grammar and structure to communicate and presentation. Few minor errors in interpretation. Very few notable notable errors in spelling,
formatting (10 %).
punctuation. No visual aids (e.g. formulate argument. Many errors spelling, grammar and errors in spelling, grammar and grammar and punctuation. Visual
images, figures or diagrams) are in spelling, grammar and punctuation. Visual aids (e.g. punctuation. Visual aids (images, aids (e.g. images, figures or

used. Discussion of concepts punctuation. No visual aids (e.g. images, figures or diagrams) are figures or diagrams) are effectively diagrams) are very effectively used

used and supporting arguments images, figures or diagrams) are used to support discussions. used to support discussions. Very to support discussions well. Very

are very difficult to follow. used to support discussions. Easy to read through and easy to read through and easy to read through and
Difficult to read through and comprehend. comprehend. comprehend.
comprehend.

Evidence of Research: Inadequate research both in Poor quality of research with Some good research has been On the whole, some Excellent, detailed and
detail and coverage of issues. more depth required. Not all conducted to demonstrate a comprehensive research has been comprehensive research has been
Depth of understanding of theory
Poor level of knowledge including aspects of the task have been clear understanding of key conducted. But in some areas undertaken. The report
including evidence of wider reading
inaccurate or erroneous researched and an adequate level theories and principles. more detail is needed to fully demonstrates a thorough
and relevance of sources (20 %).
information. Poor evidence of of understanding has not been Appropriate sources for support the findings. The report understanding of complex issues
wider reading with no references. demonstrated. Very limited information have been referenced demonstrates a very good and there are numerous
evidence of wider reading and but there are areas which need to understanding of the related references to information which
incomplete referencing. be approached with more rigor. theories and provides referenced support the rationale.
evidence of wider reading around
the subject.

Development and Implementation: Does not demonstrate There is limited evidence of Use of the theories, principles An appropriate approach to the An almost faultless application of
Use of appropriate theories, understanding of the issues and consideration of the appropriate and core processes has enabled task has been used. An accepted the theories, principles and
techniques and methodology to information/data used may be methods. Limited basic theories some sensible application of the methodology is followed along methodology. Very clear
validate the final work (30 %). irrelevant. Theories, principles and techniques has been accepted methodology but more with an understanding of how the awareness of the specifics of this
and tools have not been applied followed but there needs to be understanding of limitations and specifics for this case impact on case and how the model must be
correctly. There is a lack of any much greater depth to this in the output. Some areas could be adapted to suit each scenario.

7
 methodical approach and little order to generate a reliable assumptions would improve your improved by more careful
structure to the output. output. output. understanding of the
methodology.

Analysis, Evaluation and There is little or no attempt at The report is largely descriptive. Generally, the analysis and A very well justified analysis and A well-balanced and in-depth
Interpretation: analysis and evaluation. Little in Limited separate analysis and evaluation of the project is evaluation based on sound analysis and evaluation of the
the way of an analysis and evaluation of the results have satisfactory. Attempts have been knowledge and analysis. Complex findings is presented and fully
Result appraisal, resolution,
evaluation of the results has been been presented. made to show how issues are issues have been interpreted. justified.
comparison, justification and
presented. related but more work could be Some very minor flaws or incorrect
elaboration (30 %).
done to provide clearer links. judgments have been made

Summary and Conclusions: No conclusions have been drawn Conclusions drawn from the work Some useful conclusions have Very good conclusions have been Conclusions are drawn from
or are very weak and are very limited and show no been drawn which are sensible drawn which are located in and excellent and incisive analysis. The
Synthesis of achievements and
uncorroborated. added value from the work and supported by the information logically drawn from the recommendations made are clear
identification of improvements and/or
Recommendations for future carried out. Some conclusions presented and the analysis is of information presented. Clear and appropriate.
future work (10 %).
work are either irrelevant or may be incorrect or flawed. No reasonable depth. reasoning on why
unsubstantiated. effort has been made to relate recommendations have been
issues and present a cohesive set made.
of recommendations

8
Anonymous Marking
Anonymous marking policy applies to this CW submission. You must submit your work using your
student number to identify yourself, not your name.

Assessment Regulations
The University’s regulations, policies and procedures for students define the framework within which
teaching and assessment are conducted. Please make sure you are familiar with these regulations,
policies and procedures.