UBC - APSC 100 Sample Final Exam - Winter 2018


APSC 100 Sample Final Exam 



  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: _____                                                          




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: _____                                                          


Fill  out  your  multiple  choice  computer  scorecard  with the following information: 


Your name  written on the top 


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) 

Answer  Part  1  in  pencil   on  your  multiple  choice  computer score card.   

You are permitted to have a pencil, pen, eraser, and  ruler  for  this  exam.    No  other  aids  or  devices  are  permitted. 



Each examination candidate must be prepared to  produce,  upon  the  request  of  the  invigilator  or  examiner, his or her UBC card for identification. 


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. 


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),  pleas  of  accident  or  forgetfulness  shall  not  be  received. 


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.

speaking  or  communicating  with  other  examination candidates;  ii.

purposely exposing written papers to the  view of other examination candidates or  imaging devices;  iii.

purposely viewing the written papers of  other examination candidates;  iv.

using  or  having  visible  at  the  place  of  writing  any  books,  papers  or  other  memory aid devices; and,  v.

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. 


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. 


Examination  candidates  must  follow  any  additional  examination  rules  or  directions  communicated  by  the  examiner(s)  or  invigilator(s). 




UBC Engineering Code of Ethics



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:


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 achievement.


Commit themselves to advance their body of knowledge, engage in professional development, and acknowledge the importance of lifelong learning.


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.


Report any hazardous, illegal, or unethical decisions or practices by any member of our community.


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.



1 https://ubcengineers.ca/eus/traditions/ironpin/

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 “*”.



List nine key stakeholders in the Site C Clean Energy Project. (For full marks, give a diverse list of stakeholders.) *


What are three diverse considerations in determining where to place a wind turbine? *


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


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.


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:


List four concept generation guidelines that are addressed by C-sketch?


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


Match the different types of prototypes below to the appropriate boxes in the figure. * simple mock-ups

CAD models production quality rapid prototypes sketches Choices:


Focused Comprehensive



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


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?


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.”


List three pros and three cons that result from the construction and operation of a hydroelectric dam.

Pros Cons


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.

Score Sample comments






Page 6 of 11


What are three differences between a “simple system” and a “complex system?” *


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 “*”.



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














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) *


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: o The bed shall be made only of cardboard o The bed shall use no more than 3 m


of cardboard, but less is better o The bed shall support at least 100 kg, but optimally 200 kg or more o The bed shall have a length of at least 2.0 m, but optimally 2.5 m or more o The bed can be assembled in a maximum time of 5 minutes, but less is better o 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.

Criterion  Weight 

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% 

Time to assemble  15% 

8  1.6  5  1.0  6  1.2 

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 

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