CSE2140
Spring 2008
Term Project
Objective: The term project consists of a Logicworks design which is based on the knowledge the student gained throughout the semester in the lecture and lab sessions. The term project is meant to challenge the student’s ability in applying their understanding and knowledge of logical design to a practical problem.
Grade Weight: 20% of the total lab grade.
Problem:
You buy a simple digital watch that has following features:
1- Time of the day in 24 hr format
2- Date as mm-dd
3- Counter with precision of hundredth of seconds counts up to 999.99
You become curious and ask yourself, “Can I design a logic circuit that has the same features with my skill in digital design?” As you think more carefully, you become confident and say: “Yes I can! Let’s give it a try!!!”
Here is how you look at the project at the high level:
The functions of clock keys are listed in the table below
|
Key |
Function |
Points |
|
Time Set |
If set to 1, each click on UP/Clear increases the
minutes by 1 |
15% |
|
Date Set |
If set to 1, each click on UP/Clear increases the
day by 1 |
10% |
|
Counter/Clock |
Switch between Clock mode and Counter mode. For
example if the watch is in clock mode, clicking on the Counter/Clock key will
switch the Clock seven-segment-display OFF (without stopping the clock
operation) and will switch the Counter seven-segment-display ON |
15% |
|
Counter Start/Stop |
While in the counter mode, starts and stops the
counter |
10% |
|
Up/Clear |
If in the counter mode, resets the counter to 0 |
10% |
Instruction: You should design the logical circuit that operates as the above watch. You are free to use all the capacities and components of the Logicworks program.
Design Requirements:
- You have to design the BCD to seven-segment display converter logic which is described in Chapter 4 of the Carroll Book.
- For the Time and Date operations all the restrictions and rules of regular clocks should be considered: Each minute = 60 seconds, each day is 24 hours, and at the end of the day the date will be moved forward.
- For the Date follow the normal Gregorian calendar. There will be no leap year.
- You have different colored seven-segment displays for Time, Date and Counter.
Submission Materials:
1-
Hardcopy of the Term Project report
should be in the lab report format. In the report you should clearly define the
list of components that you have used in the design. If any new component is
used which has not been used before, operation of that component should be
clearly defined. Also, you need give reasonable detail in the description for
the design of the Keys and Clock operation, but you do not need to describe
every single wire connection. There is
no need for the experiment section of the report since you will not be
implementing the design. (15%) (It would be appreciated if two
copies of the Term Project report are turned in at the same time – one for Amin
and one for Dr. T – but only one copy is required.)
2-
Engineering lab notebook should be turned in to TA with Term Project report for
use in ABET Outcome c) assessment.
3- Softcopy of the Logicworks design should be emailed to mazloom@uta.edu by the due date. (10%)
Presentation Requirements: Each student is given 10 minutes slot time to present their work. (15%)
Important Notice: The term project is an individual project so no group design and submission is acceptable.
Due Date and Late Penalty:
Hard copy of report is due on Tuesday April 29, 2006 at 3:30 pm. Submissions after this time until April 30 at 3:30 receive 20% late penalty on the entire project grade. From April 30th until May 3rd at 3:30pm there will be an additional 5% late penalty per day. No submission accepted after May 3rd.
Presentation Time: Presentation will start from the week after spring break on a voluntary base order and will have 10% bonus points. Those who have not presented their work by the week of April 22nd will be given a mandatory presentation time slot. Notice that the soft copy of the Logicworks in due at the presentation time.
Important Statement of Ethics Compliance: The UTA statement of ethics is completely followed and implemented in project review and grading. The copy of statement of ethics could be found at
Excerpt from CSE2140 Digital Logic (Lab
class) Spring 2008 Syllabus
Lab
Final Exam/ABET Outcome task:
Material
covered on the exam will be based on the practical class experiences and
required preparatory work for the lab practicum tasks. The final exam will
assess the student’s ability to perform an experiment using the understanding
gained from the lab class.
Undergraduate students achieving a semester grade of C or
better, but failing the
experimentation assessment (below 60%) and documenting
their circumstances will be assigned a semester grade of I
(incomplete) and may re-attempt the assessment in the next semester. If the assessment is then passed, the
semester grade will be changed from I to the achieved
grade.
Students in CSE 2140 are being assessed on ABET Outcome c) “Ability to design a system, component, or process to meet desired needs”
ABET outcome
assessment rubric for Lab Final Exam/ABET Outcome task:
The Lab Final Exam/ABET Outcome task will be the Term Project for CSE 2140 and it will be graded two ways.
1) As the Lab Final Exam it will be graded by the point scoring listed above in the Term Project description.
2) As the ABET Outcome task to assess the ability to design a component to meet desired needs, the Term Project will be graded based on how well it demonstrates the steps of the Engineering Design Process as given below.
For ABET Outcome assessment, the materials that will be graded will be:
a) the Term Project Report AND
b) the engineering lab notebook that has been used throughout the semester.
It is expected that the planning and research for the Term Project Report is recorded in the lab notebook in the same fashion as for previous labs. The Term Project Report and engineering lab notebook must be turned in to the TA for grading. (They can be picked up from Dr. T if desired after grades are posted.)
Below is a version of the Engineering Design Process. Following that, there is a rubric that will be used for grading the Term Project as an ABET Outcome task demonstrating the ABET Outcome c) by using the Engineering Design Process.
Engineering Design Process FTDTB (filtered through Dr. Tiernan’s brain):
Problem Specification
1. Identify and specifically define the problem.
2. Research the need or problem
3. Identify criteria and constraints
Solution Determination
4. Develop a list of possible solutions.
5.
Explore
possible solutions (cost/benefit, pros/cons)
6. Evaluate the options using criteria identified by the problem specification.
7. Choose the optimum solution.
Implementation
8. Build a model or prototype
Evaluation
9. Test and evaluate the solution
Solution Refinement and Completion
10. Refine the design based on evaluation
11. Repeat Engineering Design Process with new design until acceptable solution for original problem is completed.
12. Communicate the solution
ABET outcome c)
assessment rubric for
Final Exam/ABET
Outcome task to assess use of the
Engineering Design Process (FTDTB):
(“Student term project documentation” is the Term Project report plus the engineering lab notebook.)
In the assessment rubric point (EDP1 – EDP12) below, the 5, 3, and 1 levels indicate level of success in achieving the particular assessment criteria. The percentage given in braces after each rubric point indicates the percentage which that rubric point contributes to the overall assessment.
Problem Specification - rubric points {total of 17%}
EDP1: Student term project documentation includes Term Project description which contains the given problem to solve. {2%}
Level 5: Term project description included
Level 3: Term project description talked about but not included
Level 1: Student documentation does not include problem description
EDP2: Student term project documentation shows evidence of research related to understanding the given problem. {5%}
5: Notes and references are recorded in the engineering notebook and/or properly cited references are used in the Term Project report
3: Notes are recorded without attribution in the engineering notebook and/or references are used in the Term Project report without proper citation
1: No evidence of research
EDP3: Student term project documentation identifies problem criteria and constraints {10%}
5: Criteria and constraints above and beyond those given in the Term Project description are documented and clearly identified in the engineering notebook and/or Term Project report
3: Criteria and constraints given in the Term Project description are clearly identified in the engineering notebook and/or Term Project report
1: Criteria and constraints are not addressed in term project documentation
Solution Determination - rubric points {total of 30%}
EDP4: Student term project documentation shows evidence of solution development {18%}
5: The engineering notebook and/or Term Project report document at least three approaches (or three places where multiple solutions are considered) to solving all or part of the Term project problem. Ex: Using counters or using primitive logic to implement part of the date mechanism would be two different approaches.
3: The engineering notebook and/or Term Project report document at least two choices for solving some part of the Term project problem.
1: The engineering notebook and/or Term Project report document that only one solution was ever considered OR no documentation exists.
EDP5: Student term project documentation shows consideration of each solution approach in terms of cost/benefit, pros/cons, risks/rewards or other analysis {5%}
5: The engineering notebook and/or Term Project report document(s) meaningful analysis of each solution decision point.
3: The engineering notebook and/or Term Project report document(s) meaningful analysis of at least two solution decision points.
5: No analysis of solution decision points is documented.
EDP6: Student term project documentation shows evaluation of each solution approach in terms of the problem criteria and constraints {5%}
5: The engineering notebook and/or Term Project report document(s) meaningful evaluation of each solution decision point.
3: The engineering notebook and/or Term Project report document(s) meaningful evaluation of at least two solution decision points.
1: No evaluation of solution decision points is documented.
EDP7: Student term project documentation shows choice of optimum solution approach in terms of the analysis and evaluation {2%}
5: The engineering notebook and/or Term Project report document(s) choices clearly with reasons and additional notations about tradeoffs or other issues.
3: The engineering notebook and/or Term Project report document(s) choices with some reasons recorded.
1: No choice rationale of solution is documented.
Implementation - rubric points {total of 10%}
EDP8: Student term project Logicworks design demonstrates model for solution {10%}
5: The Logicworks design includes all required functionality
3: The Logicworks design includes half of the required functionality
1: The Logicworks design does not implement required functionality
Evaluation - rubric points {total of 15%}
EDP9: Student term project documentation shows testing and evaluation results for Logicworks design model for solution {15%}
5: The engineering notebook and/or Term Project report describes more than three types of tests done during implementation of Logicworks design and results
3: The engineering notebook and/or Term Project report describes one or two types of tests done during implementation of Logicworks design and results
1: The engineering notebook and/or Term Project report has no description of tests done during implementation of Logicworks design and/or no results
Solution Refinement and Completion - rubric points {total of 28%}
EDP10: Student term project documentation shows changes made to Logicworks design model for solution based on results of testing and evaluation {10%}
5: The engineering notebook and/or Term Project report document(s) at least four changes made as a result of test evaluation during implementation of Logicworks design
3: The engineering notebook and/or Term Project report document(s) one or two changes made as a result of test evaluation during implementation of Logicworks design
1: The engineering notebook and/or Term Project report does not document(s) changes made as a result of test evaluation
EDP11: Student term project documentation and Logicworks design provide a working and correct solution for the given problem {8%}
5: The Logicworks design successfully accomplishes all required functionality
3: The Logicworks design correctly accomplishes half of the required functionality
1: The Logicworks design accomplishes no correct functionality
EDP12: Student term project documentation and in-class presentation describes Logicworks design model for solution {10%}
5: The Logicworks design is clearly and completely described
3: Parts of the Logicworks design are described but not all or all is described but not clearly.
1: The Logicworks design is not described.
Example rubric for Engineering Design Process:
Student
Achievement Levels
|
Level Criterion |
Percent
weight |
Level 5 |
Level 4 |
Level 3 |
Level 2 |
Level 1 |
|
Problem
Specification |
15%
– 35% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
EDP1: Identify problem |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
EDP2: Research problem |
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
EDP3: Criteria/constraints |
10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Solution
Determination |
20%
- 40% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
EDP4: Possible solutions |
18 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
EDP5: Solution pro/con … |
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
EDP6: Solution vs. criteria |
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
EDP7: Solution choice |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Implementation |
10%
- 25% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
EDP8: Model / prototype |
10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Evaluation |
15%
- 40% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
EDP9: Test model |
15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Solution
Refinement |
20%
- 40% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
EDP10:
Refine design |
10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
EDP11:
Iterate to success |
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
EDP12:
Communicate |
10 |
|
|
|
|
|