UBC - APSC 100 Sample Final Exam - Winter 2018

APSC 100 Sample Final Exam BOX A: if you requested to prevent your personal information from being stored on a cloud‐based system, do NOT complete this section and instead complete Box B Name: _____________________________________ Student Number: _______________________ Signature: __________________________________ Class Section: _____ BOX B: complete this section ONLY if you requested prior to the exam to withhold your personal information. An invigilator will come to you and assign your Identifier Token to fill in below. Alias: | | | | | | | | | | | Class Section: _____ INSTRUCTIONS Fill out your multiple choice computer scorecard with the following information: 1. Your name written on the top 2. Your student number written in the boxes below “Student ID Number” AND filled out using the numbered bubbles There are three parts to this exam: 
Part 1: multiple choice (50 marks) not included Part 2: short answer (45 marks) Part 3: written answer (25 marks) pleas of accident or forgetfulness shall not be received. 6. Examination candidates suspected of any of the following, or any other similar practices, may be immediately dismissed from the examination by the examiner/invigilator, and may be subject to disciplinary action: i.
Answer Part 1 in pencil on your multiple choice computer score card. iv.
You are permitted to have a pencil, pen, eraser, and ruler for this exam. No other aids or devices are permitted. v.
READ AND OBSERVE THE FOLLOWING RULES 3. Each examination candidate must be prepared to produce, upon the request of the invigilator or examiner, his or her UBC card for identification. 4. Examination candidates are not permitted to ask questions of the examiners or invigilators, except in cases of supposed errors or ambiguities in examination questions, illegible or missing material, or the like. 5. Examination candidates must conduct themselves honestly and in accordance with the rules established herein. Should dishonest behaviour be observed by the examiner(s) or invigilator(s), speaking or communicating with other examination candidates; purposely exposing written papers to the view of other examination candidates or imaging devices; purposely viewing the written papers of other examination candidates; using or having visible at the place of writing any books, papers or other memory aid devices; and, using or operating electronic devices including but not limited to telephones, calculators, computers, or similar devices. Electronic devices must be completely powered down if present at the place of writing. 7. Examination candidates must not destroy or damage any examination material, must hand in all examination papers, and must not take any examination material from the examination room. 8. Examination candidates must follow any additional examination rules or directions communicated by the examiner(s) or invigilator(s). CANDIDATES MUST IMMEDIATELY STOP WRITING WHEN THE INVIGILATOR ANNOUNCES THE EXAM IS OVER. UBC Engineering Code of Ethics1
UBC Engineering students, staff and faculty shall act at all times with courtesy, honesty, and respect
to each other and society.
In keeping with their duty to the community, the engineering profession, and the public, they
commit to creating a welcoming, respectful and ethical environment that values all members.
Accordingly, community members shall:
1. Uphold the academic integrity of the university and of the UBC Engineering degree,
submitting work only when it is founded upon honest efforts and personal
2. Commit themselves to advance their body of knowledge, engage in professional
development, and acknowledge the importance of lifelong learning.
3. Conduct themselves with respect and integrity when interacting with all members
of our community and society at large, give credit where it is due and accept, as
well as give, honest and fair professional comment.
4. Report any hazardous, illegal, or unethical decisions or practices by any member of
our community.
5. Extend public knowledge and appreciation of engineering and protect the
profession from misrepresentation and misunderstanding.
This code was adapted, with permission, from the APEGBC Code of Ethics, and agreed upon by the
Engineering Undergraduate Society Council.
Notes and tips for this practice exam are contained in these shaded boxes.
The questions in this document have appeared in past midterm and final exams. They are intended to aid
you in your course review. Your exam will differ in content and question style. Use this as a study aid
– do not treat it as a template for your final exam. Refer to the course learning goals and course materials
(online, lecture, and studio) to determine assessable material.
A full APSC 100 final exam is 120 marks (see the cover). Standard APSC 100/101 exam format is based
on a target of 1 mark per minute. With a 2.5-hour duration for final exams, this provides a generous amount
of time to complete the exam (i.e. you should be able to finish with approximately 30 minutes remaining).
Tip: this practice exam has 70 marks. To replicate exam conditions, print a copy of this exam, find a quiet
place, and set a timer for 70 minutes. Try to complete all questions within that time; if you need additional
time, continue up to a maximum of 85 minutes. Do not look at the solutions until you have finished writing.
Page 2 of 11
Part 1 – Multiple Choice [50 questions, 50 marks] Answer all 50 questions. Choose the best response – a given question may have more than one choice that
is correct, but marks will only be given for the best answer.
This sample exam does not include multiple choice questions. For multiple choice question style, refer to
the practice midterm or the actual midterm from this course. For practice multiple choice questions for
study purposes, refer to the screencast self-tests. Part 2 – Short‐Answer Questions [15 questions, 45 marks] Answer all 15 questions in the spaces provided. The size of the answer boxes should guide you to how
detailed your response should be - work outside the boxes will NOT be graded. For full marks, answers
need to be clear, concise, and legible. Each question is worth 3 marks.
Questions on your exam will differ in content and style. See the solutions document for additional notes on
each question, and in particular for questions marked with “*”. 1. List nine key stakeholders in the Site C Clean Energy Project. (For full marks, give a diverse list
of stakeholders.)*
2. What are three diverse considerations in determining where to place a wind turbine? *
3. Briefly compare and contrast Materials Engineering to Chemical and Biological Engineering.
Focus on the general disciplines, not the specific programs at UBC. Give three points.
Page 3 of 11
4. An engineering team working on a design project fails to follow a formal design process, but notes
that they completed the project very quickly thereby giving them more time to take on other
projects for their company. State three potential negative consequences that they may face as a
result of their approach.
5. Imagine you develop two prototypes for your Module 3 project: a rough clay model of a part to
check size, followed by a detailed SolidWorks model of the part for 3D printing. Classify these
two prototypes using the framework from class.*
Clay model:
SolidWorks model:
6. List four concept generation guidelines that are addressed by C-sketch?
7. Complete the Causal Loop Diagram below by adding links, arrowheads, and polarity (+ or -), as
appropriate. Do NOT add nodes or indicate delays in the diagram.
Page 4 of 11
8. Match the different types of prototypes below to the appropriate boxes in the figure. *
simple mock-ups
CAD models
production quality
rapid prototypes
9. Complete the sustainability diagram below by writing the names in the boxes shown. For the
“bearable” region, give an example in the box of an action or solution that fits that region.*
Bearable (give example)
Page 5 of 11
10. Consider an “elevator pitch.”
a) Where does the term “elevator pitch” come from? (i.e. what does it refer to?)
b) What are the key elements and/or characteristics of an elevator pitch?
11. Briefly describe how the Stockholm example from class (i.e. the one that initially started with a
bridge replacement to reduce congestion) related to “scales.”
12. List three pros and three cons that result from the construction and operation of a hydroelectric
13. You have been asked to give example comments to accompany a grading rubric. The rubric will
be used for APSC 100 students to conduct a peer review of the other members of the tutorial team.
Create samples of honest, fair, and constructive feedback that would be appropriate for each of
the scores in the table below.
Sample comments
Page 6 of 11
14. What are three differences between a “simple system” and a “complex system?”*
15. Consider this graphic relating to bananas over the period from 1960 to 1980. What is the single
biggest issue with the message communicated in this figure? (i.e. could it be misinterpreted?)*
Page 7 of 11
Part 3 – Written‐Answer Questions (25 marks) Answer all questions in the spaces provided. The size of the answer boxes should guide you to how
detailed your response should be - work outside the boxes will NOT be graded. For full marks, answers
need to be clear, concise, and legible.
Questions on your exam will differ in content and style. See the solutions document for additional notes on
each question, and in particular for questions marked with “*”. 16. Consider this scenario and then respond to the prompts below in the spaces provided. (9 marks)*
Scenario: You are at a social gathering and you overhear a few classmates discussing pranks for
Engineering week. You join the conversation, and at first the ideas that everyone is sharing sound both
funny and harmless so you agree to work with these classmates to design and implement a prank. On
the day of the prank, another colleague joins your group and you discover that they have changed the
plan in such a way that makes the prank dangerous (i.e. it could result in injury). Additionally you feel
there is a risk of property damage, and any incident would certainly cause reputational damage to the
Faculty and the University. You now find yourself in an ethical dilemma.
a) State the nature of the dilemma
b) List 3 courses of action that you could take and for each action specify the risks and consequences
to you, the other members of the group, and the general public
Page 8 of 11
c) Identify the most relevant tenet of the UBC Engineering Code of Ethics (see front of exam) that you
would draw on to help you choose a course of action. Justify your choice.
d) Identify tools or strategies that you could use to help you decide what to do
Page 9 of 11
17. In the space below, write an elevator pitch for your team’s solution to the Cardboard Chair
project, to be presented to another team. Your pitch must be contained in the box below, so
carefully plan out what you are going to write before you start (use the blank space at the end of
the exam for personal notes). (8 marks) *
18. Consider this scenario that was discussed in class, and then answer the questions that follow:
A team is designing a cardboard bed for emergency response. The following target design
specifications have been identified:
The bed shall be made only of cardboard
The bed shall use no more than 3 m2 of cardboard, but less is better
The bed shall support at least 100 kg, but optimally 200 kg or more
The bed shall have a length of at least 2.0 m, but optimally 2.5 m or more
The bed can be assembled in a maximum time of 5 minutes, but less is better
The bed shall have a height off the ground between 0.15 and 0.25 m
Stakeholders have said their primary concern is minimizing the amount of cardboard used per bed.
The team generated six ideas (A, B, C, D, E, F) during concept generation. After screening, the
team immediately constructs the following WDM.
Concept A Concept B Concept C Raw Score Raw Score Raw Score Cardboard used 35% 5 1.75 8 2.8 9 3.15 Weight supported 20% 10 2.0 5 1.0 0 0.0 Length 20% 8 1.6 5 1.0 6 1.2 Time to assemble 15% 2 0.3 7 1.05 3 0.45 Height off ground 5% 7 0.35 4 0.2 4 0.2 Weighted Score: 6.00 6.05 5.0 Criterion Weight Page 10 of 11
a) Why do Concepts D, E, and F most likely not appear in the WDM? Explain.
b) What do the raw scores for “weight supported” tell you about the actual weight capacity (in kg) of
Concepts A and C? Why?
c) What is the MOST significant error the team has made in the WDM? Why? (Note: you may assume
all scores and weighted scores have been accurately computed – no need to check the math.)
d) What would you recommend the team do next with Concepts A, B, and C based solely on the
weighted scores in this WDM? Why?
e) Assuming the team fixes any errors in the WDM, re-computes the scores, and gets similar results
to above. What would you recommend the team do next in their design process? Explain.
Page 11 of 11
Related flashcards
Create Flashcards