Competition Regulations...2019 Levels 2 3 4 Competition Regulations 7 ARTICLE C1 - Definitions C1.1...
Transcript of Competition Regulations...2019 Levels 2 3 4 Competition Regulations 7 ARTICLE C1 - Definitions C1.1...
Competition RegulationsLevel 2: ROV, Level 3: Spatial Design & 4: Submarine Classes
2019
Proudly Supported by An initiative of
Version 1.0
2019 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations2
AUTHORISED AGENTThe SUBS in SchoolsTM STEM Challenge is an initiative of and managed in Australia by Re-Engineering Australia Foundation Ltd. All rights reserved.
Re-Engineering Australia Foundation Ltd.PO Box 136Castle Hill NSW 1765P: 61 2 9620 9944F: 61 2 8079 0622E: [email protected]: www.rea.org.au
COPYRIGHT NOTICEThis document, all its contents (including images, text, procedures) are copyright 2019Re-Engineering Australia Foundation Ltd.All rights reserved.
REPRODUCTIONThis document may only be reproduced by schools registered in the SUBS in School STEM Challenge in Australia. Non-participating schools in Australia and overseas must first seek permission from Re-Engineering Australia Foundation Ltd. prior to reproducing.
ALTERATIONSRe-Engineering Australia Foundation Ltd. reserves the right to alter any specifications and documentation associated with the ‘Challenge’ without prior notice.
CONTRIBUTORSRe-Engineering Australia Foundation Ltd. acknowledges the valuable contributions of the Australian Government Department of Defence and SAAB Australia in the development of this Challenge
Proudly Supported by
Introduction / Authorised Agent
2019 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations 3
Table of Contents | Introduction
TABLE OF CONTENTSPreface - Summary of Main Revisions from Review of 2018 Season ..................................................... 5
ARTICLE C1 - Definitions ................................................................................................................................7C1.1 Australian Competition Season ........................................................................................................................ 7C1.2 Australian Competition Calendar ..................................................................................................................... 7C1.3 State & National Finals......................................................................................................................................... 7C1.4 SUBS in Schools National Coordinator ......................................................................................................... 7C1.5 Language Used ........................................................................................................................................................ 7C1.6 Parc Fermé ................................................................................................................................................................ 7C1.7 Event Programme ................................................................................................................................................... 7C1.8 Judging Schedule .................................................................................................................................................... 7C1.9 Terms and Conditions for Entry ......................................................................................................................... 7C1.10 Regulations Documents ....................................................................................................................................... 7C1.11 Key Performance Indicators (KPI’s) .................................................................................................................8C1.12 Trial Event ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................8
C1.13 Water Craft1 ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................8
C1.14 Project Elements .....................................................................................................................................................8C1.15 Engineering Drawings ............................................................................................................................................8C1.16 Penalties .....................................................................................................................................................................8C1.17 Competition Levels ...............................................................................................................................................9
ARTICLE C2 - General Regulations ............................................................................................................. 9C2.1 Representative Team Selection ........................................................................................................................9C2.2 Cost of Participation ..............................................................................................................................................9C2.3 Team & Project Entry Conditions ......................................................................................................................9C2.4 Competition Procedural Regulations ............................................................................................................. 11C2.5 Team Responsibilities ..........................................................................................................................................12C2.6 Role and Responsibility of Supervising Teacher. ........................................................................................12C2.7 Team partnerships/collaborations ..................................................................................................................13C2.8 REA Corporate Partner Logos and National Support ..............................................................................13C2.9 Mandatory Project Elements Submitted at Event Check-in ................................................................ 14C2.10 Project Judging Elements Detailed Information ....................................................................................... 15C2.11 Project Elements Retained by REA Foundation Ltd. ............................................................................... 16
ARTICLE C3 - Competition and Judging Format .....................................................................................16C3.1 Event Programme ................................................................................................................................................. 16C3.2 Judging Schedule .................................................................................................................................................. 16C3.3 Judging Panels ........................................................................................................................................................17C3.4 Who Attends Judging? ........................................................................................................................................17C3.5 Students with Special Needs ............................................................................................................................17C3.6 Judging Categories ................................................................................................................................................17C3.7 Point Allocations ................................................................................................................................................... 18C3.8 Judging Score Cards ............................................................................................................................................. 18C3.9 Critical regulations ................................................................................................................................................ 18
ARTICLE C4 - Specifications Judging (80 Points) .................................................................................19C4.1 General Information ............................................................................................................................................. 19C4.2 Specification Judging Decision Appeals ...................................................................................................... 19
ARTICLE C5 - Engineering Judging (200/ 150 Points) .........................................................................20C5.1 General Information ............................................................................................................................................ 20C5.2 Key Criteria .............................................................................................................................................................. 20
ARTICLE C6 - Portfolio Judging (130 Points) ......................................................................................... 22C6.1 General Information .............................................................................................................................................22C6.2 Key Criteria ...............................................................................................................................................................22
ARTICLE C7 - Marketing Judging (110/125 Points) ............................................................................... 23C7.1 General Information .............................................................................................................................................23C7.2 Key Criteria .............................................................................................................................................................. 24C7.3 Trade Display Arrangements ........................................................................................................................... 24
ARTICLE C8 - Verbal Presentation Judging (165 Points) .................................................................... 27C8.1 General Information .............................................................................................................................................27C8.2 Key Criteria ...............................................................................................................................................................27
2019 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations4
ARTICLE C9 - Trials (200 Points) ..............................................................................................................28C9.1 Trials - ROV & Submarine ................................................................................................................................. 28C9.2 General Information ............................................................................................................................................ 28C9.3 Level 2 Trial Procedure (ROV Class) ............................................................................................................. 29C9.4 Level 2 Trial Scoring (ROV Class) ....................................................................................................................31C9.5 Level 4 Trial Procedure (Submarine Class) ................................................................................................32C9.6 Level 4 Trial Scoring .............................................................................................................................................33C9.7 Pre-Competition Testing Evidence ............................................................................................................... 34
ARTICLE C10 - Water Craft Repairs / Servicing ........................................................................................34C10.1 Water craft repairs ............................................................................................................................................... 34
ARTICLE C11 - Grievances .............................................................................................................................35C11.1 Procedure ................................................................................................................................................................ 35C11.2 Judge’s Decision ................................................................................................................................................... 35
ARTICLE C12 - Judges .....................................................................................................................................36C12.1 Overview .................................................................................................................................................................. 36C12.2 Chair of Judges ...................................................................................................................................................... 36C12.3 The Judging Teams .............................................................................................................................................. 36C12.4 Judging Decisions ................................................................................................................................................. 36
ARTICLE C13 - Awards ...................................................................................................................................36C13.1 Awards Celebration ............................................................................................................................................. 36C13.2 Participation Recognition ................................................................................................................................. 36C13.3 Prizes and Trophies ..............................................................................................................................................37C13.4 List of Awards to be Presented ........................................................................................................................37
ARTICLE C14 - Appendices ...........................................................................................................................39C14.1 Development Class Trade Displays .............................................................................................................. 39C14.2 Shell Scheme Trade Display ............................................................................................................................40C14.3 Awards Matrix - Level 2 & 4 ROV & SUBS ................................................................................................... 41C14.4 Awards Matrix - Level 3 Spatial Design ....................................................................................................... 42C14.5 Development Class Portfolio Content Page Plan ................................................................................... 43C14.6 Professional Class Portfolio Content Page Plan ......................................................................................44C14.7 Portfolio Page Content Plan - Level 3 Spatial Design............................................................................ 45C14.8 Criteria 1 - Specifications Compliance Score Card (Level 2: ROV Class) .......................................46C14.9 Criteria 1 - Specifications Compliance Score Card (Level 4: Submarine Class) (1 of 2) ............47C14.10 Criteria 1 - Specifications Compliance Score Card (Level 4: Submarine Class) (2 of 2) ..........48C14.11 Criteria 2 - Computer Aided Design Score Card (Level 3: Spatial Design Class) ........................49C14.12 Criteria 2 - Computer Aided Design Score Card (Level 2: ROV & Level 4: Submarine Class) 50C14.13 Criteria 3 - Engineering: Manufacturing Score Card (Level 2: ROV & Level 4: Submarine Class) ... 51C14.14 Criteria 4 - Engineering: Design Process Score Card (Level 3: Spatial Design Class) ............... 52C14.15 Criteria 4 - Engineering: Design Process Score Card (Level 2: ROV & Level 4: Submarine Class) . 53C14.16 Criteria 5 - Portfolio: Project Management Score Card (All Classes) .............................................. 54C14.17 Criteria 6 - Portfolio: Portfolio Design Score Card (All Classes) ........................................................ 55C14.18 Criteria 7 - Marketing: Branding Score Card (All Classes) ....................................................................56C14.19 Criteria 8 - Marketing: Trade Display Score Card (Level 3: Spatial Design Class) .......................57C14.20 Criteria 8 - Marketing: Trade Display Score Card (Level 2: ROV & Level 4: Submarine Class) ..58C14.21 Criteria 9 - Presentation: Technique Score Card (All Classes) ........................................................... 59C14.22 Criteria 10 - Presentation: Content Score Card (All Classes) .............................................................60C14.23 Criteria 11 - Trials: Rov Trial Score Card (Level 2: ROV Class) ............................................................... 61C14.24 Criteria 11 - Trials: Subs Trial Score Card (Level 4: Submarine Class) .............................................. 62
Introduction | Table of Contents
2019 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations 5
Preface - Summary of Main Revisions from Review of 2018 Season
This document only contains ‘Competition Regulations’. A separate document encompasses the ‘Technical Regulations’.
This preface provides an overview of all competition related regulations that have been revised from the 2018 season’s regulations.
It is each team’s responsibility to thoroughly read this document in order to identify wording changes and to understand any impact this may have on their project.
All changes are identified within the document by using red underlined text
These regulations will be valid for the 2019 State and National Finals.
ARTICLE C1 - DEFINITIONSC1.12 Minor wording update.C1.15 Minor wording update.C1.16 Minor wording update.C1.17.1.1 Development Class added.C1.17.1.2 Professional Class added.C1.17.2 Minor wording update and year levels identified
ARTICLE C2 - GENERAL REGULATIONSC2.4.1.2 Wording update.C2.4.1.3 Minor wording update.C2.4.1.4 Development Class Declaration Form requirement added.C2.4.1.5 Minor wording update.C2.4.4 Minor wording update.C2.5.3.1 Minor wording update.C2.5.3.3 Teams advised to secure marketing materials on booth.C2.6.2 Minor wording update.C2.8.2 Minor wording update.C2.9.1 USB must be provided with PDF copies of portfolios and compliance booklet.C2.9.2 USB must be provided with PDF copies of portfolios and compliance booklet.C2.9.3 USB must be provided with PDF copies of portfolios and compliance booklet.C2.10.2 Wording update.C2.10.5 USB with electronic PDF’s requiredC2.10.8.1 Provision of VR technologies for Spatial Design Class added.C2.10.9 Minor wording update.C2.11 Minor wording update.
ARTICLE C3 - COMPETITION AND JUDGING FORMATC3.7 Points allocations updated.
ARTICLE C4 - SPECIFICATIONS JUDGINGC4.1.4.1 Teams to be present during specifications compliance judging.
ARTICLE C5 - ENGINEERING JUDGINGC5.2.1 Updated CAD points for Level 3 Spatial Design.C5.2.1.2 New CAD criteria for Level 3 Spatial Design.C5.2.3 Updated Design Process points for Level 3 Spatial Design.
ARTICLE C6 - PORTFOLIO JUDGINGC6.1.3.2 Updated portfolio requirements for Development Class Level 2 teams.C6.1.5 Additional penalty added.
ARTICLE C7 - MARKETING JUDGINGC7 Updated points allocationC7.1.3 Minor wording update to reflect Development Class portfoliosC7.2.1.1 Updated Branding criteria.C7.2.2 Updated Trade Display points allocation.C7.2.2.1 Updated Trade Display criteria.C7.3.1 New Trade Display recommended build considerationsC7.3.3.2 New Development Class Trade Displays added.C7.3.5 New condition added for Development class.C7.3.6 New inclusion of one penalty for Trade Displays.
ARTICLE C8 - VERBAL PRESENTATION JUDGINGC8 Total points decreased to 165.C8.2.2 Content points decreased to 95.
ARTICLE C9 - SEA TRIALC9.1 Minor wording update.C9.2.1 Wording update.
Preface - Summary of Revisions | Introduction
2019 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations6
Introduction | Preface - Summary of Revisions
C9.2.3 Wording update.C9.2.4 Minor wording update.C9.2.5 Minor wording update.C9.2.6 Minor wording update.C9.2.7 Minor wording update.C9.2.9 Minor wording update.C9.3.1 New trial order.C9.3.2.3 Wording update.C9.3.2.4 Wording update.C9.4.1 New Flotation and water column positioning trial.C9.4.2 New Submerged Manouvring Trial.C9.4.3.2 Wording update.C9.4.3.4 Wording update and sample ranking added.C9.4.3.5 Wording update.C9.5 Minor wording update.C9.5.1 Trial order added.C9.5.2.1 Minor wording update.C9.5.2.3 Wording update.C9.5.2.4 Wording update.C9.5.2.5 Trial Procedure updated.C9.6.1 New Surface Manoeuvring Trial added.C9.6.2 New flotation and ballasting trial added.C9.6.3 New submerged manoeuvring trial added.C9.6.4 Wording update and sample ranking added.C9.6.5 Wording update and penalty added.C9.7 Pre-Competition testing evidence added.
ARTICLE C10 - WATER CRAFT REPAIRS / SERVICINGC10.1.3.1 Wording update to allow running repairs.
ARTICLE C11 - GRIEVANCESC11.1.1 Wording update.
ARTICLE C12 - JUDGESThis section remains unchanged.
ARTICLE C13 - AWARDSC13.4.1 Addition of Development Class in Award provisionsC13.4.4 Inclusion of notation for overall category awards, updated criteria for Marketing Award and
inclusion of new Trade Display award
ARTICLE C14 - APPENDICESC14.1 Trade Display Level 2 Development Class: Diagram and requirements.C14.2 Shell Scheme Diagram: New additionC14.3 Awards Matrix Levels 2 & 4: New Trade Display and Best Newcomer Awards addedC14.4 Awards Matrix Level 3: New Trade Display and Best Newcomer Awards addedC14.5 Portfolio Plan Level 2 Development Class: New additionC14.6 Portfolio Plan Levels 2 & 4 Removal of orthographic on last page of portfolioC14.7 Portfolio Plan Levels 3 UpdatedC14.8 - C14.24 Scorecards: Various changes. Read carefully.
2019 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations 7
ARTICLE C1 - Definitions
C1.1 Australian Competition SeasonThe standard sequence of Australian SUBS in Schools competitions runs across a single calendar year. The State Finals held early in the year will feed to the National Final in Nov/Dec of that year. This encompasses a complete season, for which the regulations SHOULD remain constant. REA Foundation Ltd reserves the right to update / revise the regulations if deemed appropriate.
C1.2 Australian Competition CalendarThis is a calendar of State and National Final events which is available via the Finals Information tab within the SUBS in Schools menu on the REA Foundation Ltd. website, www.rea.org.au.
C1.3 State & National FinalsState and National Final events are managed by Re-Engineering Australia Ltd., are generally held over 2 - 3 days and MAY include various programmed social and competition activities. These events aim to provide all participants with an educational and personal development experience.
C1.4 SUBS in Schools National Coordinator A person employed by Re-Engineering Australia Ltd. (REA) to manage the SUBS in Schools competition in Australia.
C1.5 Language UsedThe language of the regulations is tiered. Those clauses expressed as “MUST” are mandatory and failure to comply will attract objective point and/or trials penalties and in the extreme, disqualification. Those expressed as “SHOULD” or “MAY” reflect some level of discretion and choice.
Some clauses will be satisfied through team registration processes or declarations signed as complied with as part of the Challenge Terms and Conditions, whilst others will be tested through a variety of objective and subjective judging.
C1.6 Parc FerméA secure area where all trial water craft are held to prevent unauthorised handling, but to allow technical inspections to be conducted by the Judges. (Literal meaning in French of ‘closed park’).
C1.7 Event ProgrammeThis programme will detail the schedule of all competition activities from Event Registration through to the Awards Presentation.
C1.8 Judging ScheduleA separate Judging Schedule will detail the times and locations of all judging activities for all teams.
C1.9 Terms and Conditions for EntryThere are forms prepared by Re-Engineering Australia Ltd. that teams and teachers are required to complete and submit prior to an event. These forms outline a range of Terms and Conditions that MUST be complied with as part of the initial registration process and participation of all teams in the competition. Failure to submit these forms MAY result in teams being ineligible to compete at an REA Foundation Ltd. managed State or National Final. Copies of all forms can be found within the Resources /Competition Documents tab within the SUBS in Schools menu of the REA Foundation Ltd. website. For detailed information refer to ARTICLE C2.4.1.
C1.10 Regulations Documents
C1.10.1 Issuing AuthorityREA Foundation Ltd. issues the regulations, their revisions and amendments.
C1.10.2 Competition RegulationsThis document is mainly concerned with regulations and procedures directly related to judging and the competition event. Competition Regulation articles have a ‘C’ prefix. This document SHOULD be read in conjunction with the SUBS in Schools Australian Technical Regulations document.
Definitions | Article C1
2019 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations8
Article C1 | Definitions
C1.10.3 Technical RegulationsA document separate to this one which is mainly concerned with those regulations that are directly related to SUBS in School ‘water craft’ design and manufacture. Technical Regulation articles have a ‘T’ prefix.
C1.10.4 InterpretationThe text of these regulations is in English, SHOULD any dispute arise over their interpretation, the regulation text, diagrams and any related definitions SHOULD be considered together for the purpose of interpretation.
C1.10.5 Text ClarificationAny asked questions that are deemed by REA Foundation Ltd. to be related to text needing clarification will be answered. The question and the clarification will be published on the REA Foundation Ltd. website.
C1.10.6 Supplementary Competition RegulationsOther documents MAY be issued by REA Foundation Ltd. that provide teams with further logistic and other important event information. Any supplementary regulations will be issued to all teachers and team managers of registered teams, where a valid contact email address has been supplied to REA Foundation Ltd. and published on the REA Foundation Ltd. website.
C1.11 Key Performance Indicators (KPI’s)These are portions of text that feature on the score cards within a corresponding points range. The KPI’s describe the type of evidence the Judges will be looking for in order to score the team appropriately.
C1.12 Trial Event 1
Trial component of the State and National Finals, comprising multiple trials.
C1.13 Water Craft1
This can refer to the submarine, ROV or both.
C1.14 Project ElementsThese are any materials and resources that the team presents as part of its entry for any judging activity and which are submitted at event registration or as advised.
C1.15 Engineering DrawingsCAD produced drawings which SHOULD be such that, along with compatible 3D Printing files, could theoretically be used to manufacture the fully assembled water craft by a third party. Such drawings include all relevant dimensions, tolerances and material information. SUBS in Schools engineering drawings include detail to specifically identify compliance intent for the virtual cargo and control surfaces (Level 4).
C1.16 PenaltiesA range of penalties WILL be applied for non-compliance with identified competition regulations including:
C1.16.1 Point PenaltyInvoked from non-compliance with some competition regulations governing watercraft, Portfolio or Trade Display restrictions and watercraft Servicing/Substitution. These are identified as [Point Penalty]
C1.16.2 Time Penalty:Invoked from non-compliance with Technical Regulations and other Infringements which are identified as critical through the use of the danger symbol at left. These will be identified as [Time Penalty]
C1.16.3 EligibilityTeams need to meet certain eligibility criteria to compete at a State or National Final. Failure to comply with certain eligibility criteria MAY lead to disqualification from the competition or a class of competition. These are identified as [Eligibility]
1 Not applicable to Level 3 Spatial Design
2019 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations 9
C1.17 Competition Levels There are four competition classes in the Australian SUBS in Schools competition. These Competition Regulations only relate to Level 2 , 3 and 4 for State and National Finals. Separate Competition Regulations exist for Level 1.
C1.17.1 Level 2: Design and Build a Large ROVStudents are required to build a large scale ROV which is able to support ancillary items such as cameras, robot arms, probes and the like and is able to undertake specific tasks.
C1.17.1.1 Development Class (Years 5-9)• Students MAY only compete in this class once (excluding primary school
students).
C1.17.1.2 Professional Class (Years 6-12)• Students MAY participate in this class multiple times.
C1.17.2 Level 3: Spatial Design - Accommodation Space (Years 7 - 12)This level challenges students to design a virtual galley or berth environment for a submarine using 3D CAD and Virtual Reality software.
C1.17.3 Level 4: Design and Build a Working Model Submarine (Years 7-12)At this level students take on the design/modification of a scale submarine. In the first year, the schools would be encouraged to replicate an existing design of a model submarine. In the subsequent years the schools would be able to innovate on the existing designs to improve their submarines.
ARTICLE C2 - General Regulations
C2.1 Representative Team Selection
C2.1.1 State FinalsIn all states the first level of competition for teams is usually a State Final. However, REA Foundation Ltd. reserves the right to request Regional Finals in any state IF total registrations across all classes of competition, received by the advertised deadline, exceed the maximum 24 teams allowable for any State Final.In 2019, State Finals will only be conducted in SA & WA. Teams from all other states will proceed directly to the 2019 National Final. These arrangments will be reviewed from year to year.
C2.1.2 National FinalAt each State Final, the champion teams in each class of competition and their supervising teachers (2 maximum) will be invited to represent their state at a National Final. At State Finals where only 1 – 3 teams represent an individual class of competition, the Chair of Judges will determine if the Class Champions have met the minimum standard required for a National Final. See ARTICLE C13.4 for more information.REA Foundation Ltd. reserves the right to offer ‘Wildcard’ invitations to selected teams. The number and criteria for selection is at the discretion of REA Foundation Ltd. and is not necessarily based on final rankings. Teams receiving wildcard invitations will be notified in writing within 7 days of the conclusion of the State Final.
C2.2 Cost of Participation
C2.2.1 State and National FinalsTeams and teachers are responsible for all costs associated with participating in the competition, including registration fees, as per ARTICLE C2.3.8. This includes but is not limited to project costs, travel and accommodation and meals. Some meals MAY be provided to teams and teachers at National Finals.
C2.3 Team & Project Entry Conditions
C2.3.1 Varying the ConditionsREA Foundation Ltd. reserves the right to vary the Team & Project Entry Conditions where special circumstances exist.
C2.3.2 Team MembershipEach team registered in the Australian competition MUST consist of the following
[Eligibility]
[Eligibility]
[Advice]
[Advice]
[Eligibility]
General Regulations | Article C2
2019 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations10
minimum and maximum number of students. Mixed gender teams are encouraged.C2.3.2.1 Level 2: 3 to 5 team members.
C2.3.2.2 Level 3: 3 to 5 team members.
C2.3.2.3 Level 4: 3 to 5 team members.
C2.3.3 Collaboration TeamsThese teams will ONLY be formed from State Final teams at the invitation of REA Foundation Ltd. for National Final events. A maximum of 2 schools can participate with balanced representation from each school.
C2.3.4 Supporting or Affiliate Team MembersSupporting or affiliate team members are NOT permitted for any class or level of competition.
C2.3.5 Multiple Class Entry RestrictionsIndividual students can only compete in one competition class per event.
C2.3.6 Enrolled Full-time StudentsAll team members MUST be enrolled as full-time primary/secondary students studying at school or TAFE or home schooled (at the time of the event) to be eligible to participate in State and National Final competitions.
C2.3.7 Level 2 Large ROV: Development Class Entry RequirementsC2.3.7.1 First Time ParticipationA student MAY only compete in the Development Class if they are competing in the competition for the very first time with the exception of Year 5 students who can re-register in this class in Year 6.
C2.3.7.2 Year LevelA student MAY only compete in the Development Class if they are enrolled in Years 5 - 9.
C2.3.7.3 REA Supplied Large ROV KitTeams entering the challenge in this competition class MUST purchase and use the REA supplied Development Class Large ROV kit.
C2.3.7.4 ROV Kit CustomisationTeams MUST adhere to the mandatory modifications. Additionally, there are optional modifications teams can consider incorporating:
1. Controller [10pt Penalty]Teams MUST use the standard controller supplied with the Development Class Kit.
2. Motors [10pt Penalty]Teams MUST ONLY use 3 motors on the Development Class ROV.
C2.3.7.5 Other Class Restrictions
3. PortfoliosDevelopment Class teams MUST restrict their Engineering and Enterprise Portfolios to 7 printed pages. For more information refer to ARTICLE C2.10.2.
4. Trade DisplayDevelopment Class teams MUST comply with certain Trade Display restrictions for State and National Finals. Refer to ARTICLE C7 for content requirements and information on what is provided for each class of competition.
C2.3.8 Team Registration ConditionsEach student team MUST be registered for their first competition event by the prescribed date advertised on the SUBS in Schools web site. The REA Foundation Ltd. registration process SHALL be followed and the entry fee received by REA Foundation Ltd. before the competition date. Entry fees are non-refundable once processed. Fees only apply to State and National Finals.
[Eligibility]
[Eligibility]
[Eligibility]
[Eligibility]
[Eligibility]
[Eligibility]
Article C2 | General Regulations
2019 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations 11
C2.3.9 Team Membership ChangesEach team MAY only make one change (i.e. add, subtract or substitute) to its membership when progressing to the next level of competition. REA Foundation Ltd. will consider up to two team membership changes between a State and National Final when extenuating circumstances exist and upon written request to the Rules Committee.
C2.3.10 Changes to Team Classification When progressing from State to National Finals, teams MUST remain in the class in which they qualified. This includes the effects of changes to team membership.
C2.3.11 Entered ProjectsEntered projects MUST be designed and produced during the current Challenge Season and the same project design MUST NOT be entered in more than one Challenge Season.
C2.4 Competition Procedural Regulations
C2.4.1 Submitting DocumentationEach team MUST complete and submit ALL the relevant competition documentation as required by REA Foundation Ltd. and within the stated timeframes. Some forms are signed electronically when teachers register teams. Others MUST be printed, signed and forwarded to REA prior to the event. All forms are downloadable from the Resources/Competition Documents tab of the SUBS in Schools menu on the REA Foundation Ltd website. The following documents apply:
C2.4.1.1 Terms and Conditions FormThis form constitutes an agreement between REA Foundation Ltd. and supervising teachers regarding participation by teams in State and National finals. The form is electronically signed by teachers when registering their teams on-line via the REA Foundation Ltd website. It is very important that teachers read this form before registering their teams.
C2.4.1.2 Media Consent Form (all classes)• One per student.
• Valid for the entire Australian Competition Season.
• Parent/Guardian signature required if student under 16 years.
• MUST be printed, signed and emailed or faxed to REA one month prior to event start date. Students failing to submit a signed Media Consent form by Day 1 of the event will NOT be permitted to attend or participate at an REA managed final.
C2.4.1.3 Water Craft Finishing Declaration Form (all classes)2
• One per team.
• New form MUST be signed and submitted for EACH event at check-in.
• Team Manager and Teacher signature required.
• MUST be accompanied by photographic evidence (within a team’s Engineering Compliance Booklet).
• Penalties apply for non-submission.
C2.4.1.4 Development Class Declaration FormThis form is electronically signed by teachers when they register their Development Cass team on-line. Teachers MUST be aware of and agree to the special conditions for Development Class teams before enabling the check box in the on-line registration form.
C2.4.1.5 Grievance Form (all classes)• Submission is via an on-line form, a link to which will be provided.
• Completed only if teams have a judging grievance.
• MUST be submitted by the published deadline to the Event Director.
• MUST be completed by the Team Manager ONLY.
• The Chair of Judges decision is FINAL.
2 Not applicable for Level 3 Spatial Design
[Eligibility]
[Eligibility]
[Eligibility]
[Eligibility]
[Eligibility]
[Eligibility]
[Eligibility]
[Eligibility]
[Advice]
General Regulations | Article C2
2019 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations12
C2.4.2 Event Check-inC2.4.2.1 Team AttendanceAll teams MUST attend a team event Check-in process, the timing of which will be published by REA Foundation Ltd. no less than one month prior to the State or National Final. At this check-in, teams will be issued with State or National Final accreditation, event programs and a detailed welcome pack.
C2.4.2.2 Submitting Project ElementsWhen checking in at State Finals and National Finals, each team MUST provide REA Foundation Ltd with minimum mandatory project elements as outlined in ARTICLE C2.9. Failure to provide the listed items MAY impact on a team’s eligibility to compete and judging outcomes.
C2.4.3 Team DressC2.4.3.1 Team UniformsAt State and National Finals, ONLY members of the official competing team are permitted to wear the team’s uniform.
C2.4.3.2 School UniformIn lieu of a Team Uniform, teams MAY wear an official School Uniform.
C2.4.4 Collaboration Team AwardsIf a collaboration team wins an award at a National Final which involves a perpetual trophy, this MUST be shared between the team for the 12 months following the event. Award certificates will be duplicated for awards won by collaboration teams. All trophies are to be returned.
C2.5 Team Responsibilities
C2.5.1 Australian Technical RegulationsTeams MUST read the Australian Technical Regulations carefully to ensure their designs comply with those regulations.
C2.5.2 Australian Competition RegulationsTeams MUST read the Australian Competition Regulations (this document) carefully to ensure that all project elements satisfy these regulations and that they understand the requirements and procedures for all aspects of the competition and judging.
C2.5.3 Attendance at Scheduled Activities C2.5.3.1 Team Representation OnlyDuring the competition, ONLY the official team members can represent the team at event check-in, trade display set up, verbal presentation, portfolio, marketing and engineering judging, specifications compliance feedback, critical rule rectification, trials, watercraft servicing and repair, and any direct communication with the Chair of Judges or Event/Competition Directors concerning judging matters.
C2.5.3.2 All Team Members RequiredDuring the competition it is the team’s responsibility to ensure that ALL team members are present at the correct time and location for all scheduled activities.
C2.5.3.3 Trade Display SecuritySecurity of a team’s Trade Display and its elements is the team’s responsibility during competition. Teams are strongly advised to remove and secure any marketing or other items when they are away from their booth attending judging or other activities.
C2.6 Role and Responsibility of Supervising Teacher.
C2.6.1 Terms and Conditions FormAll supervising teachers MUST carefully read and understand the terms and conditions for entry to the SUBS in Schools State & National Finals events, and MUST have explained all relevant information within this agreement to their team/s.
[Eligibility]
[Eligibility]
[Eligibility]
[Eligibility]
[Advice]
[Advice]
[Advice]
[Eligibility]
[Eligibility]
[Advice]
[Advice]
Article C2 | General Regulations
2019 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations 13
General Regulations | Article C2
C2.6.2 Other DocumentationAll supervising teachers MUST ensure all declaration and media consent forms are completed and sent to REA Foundation Ltd. by the stated deadline, otherwise teams MAY be ineligible to participate.
C2.6.3 Duty of Care by Schools & TeachersIt is the primary responsibility of any event accredited supervising teacher to administer their school’s duty of care / well-being, relevant to their education system’s guidelines, for all their student team members, throughout the entirety of REA Foundation Ltd. managed events. Any concerns arising during the event in relation to this SHOULD be brought to the attention of the SUBS in Schools Event Director immediately. A school’s Duty of Care cannot be transferred to a 3rd party such as REA Foundation Ltd.
C2.6.4 Standard of Care by REAREA Foundation Ltd. will do its utmost to administer a high Standard of Care for teachers, students and members of the public through adherence with requirements of Workplace Health & Safety, Risk Management and Child Protection procedures. It will also strive to ensure the judging process is applied fairly and equally to each and every team attending our managed events.
C2.6.5 Attending Judging Attending Judging SessionsWhere space permits and at the discretion of the Chair of Judges, ONE approved supervising teacher is permitted to observe (in the background) any judging activity with their team but MUST not interact in any way with the student team, judges or judging process. Any incident considered inappropriate will be brought to the attention of the Chair of Judges.
C2.7 Team partnerships/collaborations
C2.7.1 MentoringSUBS in Schools teams are encouraged to develop mentoring partnerships/collaborations with businesses, industry or higher education organisations throughout their project.
C2.7.2 Student Work OnlyAll design work, text and scripting for ALL project elements presented for assessment MUST be wholly undertaken and created by the team. This includes all CAD and CAM data, electronic Portfolio, Trade Display and graphic content.The process of assembling the watercraft from manufactured components, purchased components and purchased sub-assemblies MUST be wholly undertaken by the team. The process of ‘finishing’ the watercraft MUST be wholly undertaken by the team.
C2.7.3 Documenting Partnerships in PortfolioAspects of any partnerships with external individuals and organisations including mentoring and provision of services MUST be represented in the team’s Portfolios. For project elements produced utilising some outside assistance, teams SHOULD be able to demonstrate to the judges a high level of understanding of, and justification for ANY of the processes and services used.
C2.8 REA Corporate Partner Logos and National Support
C2.8.1 REA Corporate Partner LogosTeams MUST include the REA Foundation Ltd. Corporate Partner logos in their project and failure to use some or all of the logos as required will be reflected in a team’s marks in the relevant judging criteria. The logos and branding guidelines (where they exist) are available to download from the Resources tab within the SUBS in Schools menu of the REA Foundation Ltd website and teams MUST be fully aware of the conditions outlined in these documents. The two levels of Corporate Partners are clearly identified within the downloadable file. Refer to the Australian Technical Regulations.
C2.8.1.1 Level 1 Corporate Partner Logos These MUST be applied to a team’s watercraft3, portfolio, trade display and uniform. Water craft sticker decals for Level 1 REA Corporate Partners are supplied to teams immediately prior to the Submission process. Teams are NOT permitted to produce their own corporate partner decals.
3 Not applicable to Level 3 Spatial Design
[Advice]
[Advice]
[Advice]
[Advice]
[Advice]
[Advice]
[Advice]
[Advice]
[Advice]
2019 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations14
C2.8.1.2 Level 2 Corporate Partner LogosThese are identified REA partner organisations who provide a mentoring service to teams undertaking the project. Sticker decals MUST be applied to a team’s watercraft as a minimum.
C2.8.2 New SUBS in Schools LogoFrom 2019, teams MUST use the updated and trade marked SUBS in Schools Logo. No other version of the logo is permitted.
C2.8.3 SUBS in Schools & Department of Defence Logo Permitted UseUse of the SUBS in Schools and Department of Defence logos outside of the STEM Challenge is NOT permitted and use of the Department of Defence logo within the ‘Challenge’ is NOT permitted on ANY social media pages. Use is restricted to project elements such as cars, portfolios, trade displays and team uniform.
C2.8.4 Department of Defence National SupportThe Australian Government’s Department of Defence has provided REA with financial support for SUBS in Schools since 2014. As the largest financial supporter of REA activities, the Department of Defence is already a supporter of your team, so please DO NOT approach them for ANY further financial support.
C2.9 Mandatory Project Elements Submitted at Event Check-inFollowing is a summary of the mandatory elements to be submitted for judging at State and National Finals:
C2.9.1 Level 2: Build and Design a Large ROV• One complete trial ready ROV• Two (2) identical printed A3 Enterprise Portfolios, bound or in presentation folders.• Three (3) identical printed A3 Engineering Portfolios with orthographic drawing
(last page), bound or in presentation folders.• Engineering Compliance Booklet containing separate A3 size printed
engineering compliance drawing/s for specification & CAD judging and A3 size Photorealistic 3D render/s of ROV for CAD judging AND watercraft finishing and assembly evidence presented as hard copy photographs ONLY. Booklet MUST be bound or in a presentation folder when submitted.
• One USB containing electronic PDF copies of the final Enterprise Portfolio, Engineering Portfolio and Engineering Compliance Booklet.
C2.9.2 Level 3: Design an Accommodation Space• One USB containing 3D CAD design in native file format - preferably Sketchup.• Two (2) identical printed A3 Enterprise Portfolios, bound or in presentation folders.• Three (3) identical printed A3 Engineering Portfolios bound or in presentation
folders.• Engineering Compliance Booklet containing separate A3 size printed
engineering compliance drawing/s for specification & CAD judging and A3 size Photorealistic 3D render/s of Accommodation Space for CAD judging. Booklet MUST be bound or in a presentation folder when submitted.
• One USB containing electronic PDF copies of the final Enterprise Portfolio, Engineering Portfolio and Engineering Compliance Booklet.
C2.9.3 Level 4: Design and Build a Working Model Submarine• One complete trial ready submarine• Two (2) identical printed A3 Enterprise Portfolios, bound or in presentation folders.• Three (3) identical printed A3 Engineering Portfolios bound or in presentation
folders.
[Advice]
[Eligibility]
[Eligibility]
[Advice]
[Eligibility]
[Eligibility]
[Eligibility]
Article C2 | General Regulations
2019 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations 15
General Regulations | Article C2
• Engineering Compliance Booklet containing separate A3 size printed engineering compliance drawing/s for specification & CAD judging and A3 size Photorealistic 3D render/s of submarine for CAD judging AND submarine finishing and assembly evidence presented as hard copy photographs ONLY. Booklet MUST be bound or in a presentation folder when submitted.
• One USB containing electronic PDF copies of the final Enterprise Portfolio, Engineering Portfolio and Engineering Compliance Booklet.
C2.10 Project Judging Elements Detailed Information
C2.10.1 Trial Watercraft4
Each Level 2 ROV & Level 4 Submarine team MUST produce one (1) primary trial ready watercraft complete with Corporate Partner decals.
C2.10.2 PortfoliosEach team MUST submit two (2) A3 sized, ’Enterprise Portfolios’ and three (3) A3 sized ‘Engineering Portfolios’ in hard copy and bound or in a presentation folder. Each portfolio SHOULD be well written and clearly summarise the team’s key activities and key messages for assessment, evaluation, and event promotion. Teams SHOULD produce additional copies for exhibiting within the team’s Trade Booth and for Verbal Presentation if desired.Each Enterprise and Engineering Portfolio is limited to 7 PRINTED pages for the Level 2 (Development Class) and 11 PRINTED pages for all other teams which includes the front covers. This can be presented as single or double sided printed sheets. If a Portfolio comprises more than the maximum allowable PRINTED pages, the Judges will ONLY review the first 7/11 printed pages. Blank pages containing no printed matter are NOT included in the judged content or page count.
C2.10.3 Orthographic Drawing/s As a minimum, a 3rd angle orthographic projection drawing, including plan, side and end elevations of the fully assembled watercraft or accommodation space MUST be included within an Engineering Compliance Booklet which is submitted at event check-in. These elements MUST be produced using CAD. The orthographic technical drawing SHOULD include dimensions and corresponding regulation numbers in order to illustrate regulation compliance. The team name and author MUST also be included in a title block.Additional engineering drawings of their watercraft assembly and parts or accommodation space MAY also be submitted if they wish these to be referenced by the engineering and specification judges. These drawings MUST be on pages no larger than A3 in size and be bound, clearly identified with the team name.
C2.10.4 3D Photorealistic Render/sAs a minimum, a separate, duplicate, hard copy of the 3D realistic render of the final watercraft or accommodation space design appearing on the cover page of a team’s Engineering portfolio MUST also be submitted at event check-in. This is to be bound with or included in the Engineering Compliance Booklet of engineering drawings and clearly identified with the team name. Refer ARTICLE C2.10.3.
C2.10.5 USB Containing Electronic PortfoliosFrom 2019 all teams MUST provide a USB containing electronic PDF versions of their FINAL Enterprise portfolio, Engineering portfolio and Engineering Compliance booklet.
C2.10.6 Trade DisplayEach team WILL be provided with a dedicated exhibition style space for set-up of their display elements. Refer to ARTICLE C7 for further trade display specifications, content requirements and information on what is provided for each level of competition.
4 Not applicable to Level 3 Spatial Design
[Advice]
[Advice]
[Advice]
[Advice]
[Advice]
[Advice]
2019 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations16
Article C3 | Competition and Judging Format
C2.10.7 Verbal PresentationTeams WILL be required to deliver a verbal presentation in relation to their project to the Judges. The presentation MUST not last longer than ten (10) minutes. Teams MUST bring their own laptop with any slide show or other multimedia files that need to be shown as part of their verbal presentation. Teams SHOULD also have available their own VGA and HDMI cables to connect to a data projector/TV monitor. Any team who needs a laptop for verbal presentation judging and is unable to bring one to a State or National Final MUST contact REA Foundation Ltd. ([email protected]) at least one month prior to the event. Refer to ARTICLE C8 of these regulations for details regarding presentation content and other requirements.
C2.10.8 Laptops for JudgingTeams MUST bring laptops for identified judging elements as follows. If multiple teams from the same school are participating, more than one laptop SHOULD be brought to deal with situations where teams are being judged in the same time block. ANY team unable to bring a laptop to a State and National Finals event with CAD software installed MUST contact REA Foundation Ltd. ([email protected]) at least one month prior to the event in an effort to assist in finding a solution.
C2.10.8.1 Engineering JudgingA laptop with the CAD software used by Level 2 and 4 teams and with all CAD part and assembly data MUST be brought to State and National Finals events. This will be needed during the engineering judging session so that the team can demonstrate their CAD work and better explain how they engineered their watercraft
Teams undertaking Level 3 Spatial Design, will be provided with the appropriate VR technologies enabling them to demonstrate their accommodation space design to Engineering judges at State and National Finals.
C2.10.8.2 Verbal PresentationTeams wishing to run a slideshow or video as part of their Verbal Presentation MUST ensure they bring this on a laptop with their own VGA and HDMI cables available for connection to a data projector/TV monitor. Teams SHOULD ensure they are familiar with and adept at managing communication between their laptops and data projectors and TV monitors which will be provided by the organisers.
C2.10.9 Access to the InternetTeams MUST organise their own internet access via a portable wireless device if required.
C2.11 Project Elements Retained by REA Foundation Ltd.It is a condition of entry to Australian State and National Finals that each team permits REA Foundation Ltd. to retain 1 x 7/11 page printed Enterprise AND Engineering Portfolio and Compliance Booklet. Teams also permit REA Foundation Ltd. to use any of these project elements for marketing purposes and / or publication as exemplar projects for reference by others.
ARTICLE C3 - Competition and Judging Format
C3.1 Event ProgrammeAn Event Programme outlining the timing and venue for all judging and competition activities will be formulated by REA Foundation Ltd. and provided to all teams at event check-in as well as being uploaded to the REA Foundation Ltd website.
C3.2 Judging ScheduleEach team will be judged as per the Judging Schedule. The Judging Schedule will be formulated by REA Foundation Ltd. to best and fairly accommodate all judging and other competition activities.
C3.2.1 Judging Session TimingsTeams will rotate around judging activities as per this judging schedule, with each rotation usually of between 10 – 30 minutes in duration.
C3.2.2 Judging StreamsThe judging schedule MAY be divided into two or three parallel judging streams (Stream A,
[Advice]
[Advice]
[Advice]
[Eligibility]
[Advice]
[Advice]
[Advice]
2019 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations 17
Stream B and Stream C), with each judging stream responsible for a class of competition. A number of strategies are implemented within the judging process, including judge briefings and judge reviews, for cross-moderation, to ensure there is consistency across the judging streams, particularly where parallel streams exist within a class.
C3.3 Judging PanelsREA Foundation Ltd. always makes every effort to select judges from industry and higher education institutions who have knowledge and experience relevant to the panel they will be judging on. All judging panels are fully briefed by the Event Director and/or the Chair of Judges prior to the start of the competition.
C3.4 Who Attends Judging?ALL team members MUST attend every scheduled judging session as per the Judging Schedule except for Specifications Compliance Feedback. At Specifications Compliance Feedback, the Team Manager, Design Engineer and Manufacturing Engineer MUST attend as a minimum. One supervising teacher MAY observe judging sessions as per the conditions set out in ARTICLE C2.6.5. This teacher MUST not directly approach or discuss any judging matters with the judges at any time unless invited to do so.
C3.5 Students with Special NeedsIn circumstances where a student has special needs and upon written application to REA Foundation Ltd. by the supervising teacher at least one month prior to a State or National Final, every effort will be made to accommodate the needs of the student.
C3.6 Judging CategoriesThere are nine (9) main judging categories, each with its own team of judges – where possible - and specified judging activities as detailed in further articles.
• Specifications• Engineering - CAD• Engineering - Manufacturing5
• Engineering - Design Process• Portfolio – Project Management & Future Careers• Portfolio - Design Clarity & Quality• Marketing – Branding and Trade Display • Verbal Presentation - Technique & Content• Practical Demonstration (Trial)
5 Not Applicable to Level 3 Spatial Design
[Advice]
[Eligibility]
[Eligibility]
[Advice]
Competition and Judging Format | Article C3
2019 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations18
Article C3 | Competition and Judging Format
C3.7 Point AllocationsAt State and National Finals, points will be awarded to teams across six (6) categories with maximum possible scores as detailed in the following table.
State & National Final Points Allocation TableSpecifications ROV & Submarine Spatial Design
Specifications 80 points N/A
Engineering ROV & Submarine Spatial Design
CAD 65 points 70 points
Manufacturing 65 points N/A
Design Process 70 points 80 points
Portfolio ROV & Submarine Spatial Design
Project Management 80 points 80 points
Design 50 points 50 points
Marketing ROV & Submarine Spatial Design
Branding 60 points 60 points
Trade Display 506 /65 points 65 points
Verbal Presentation ROV & Submarine Spatial Design
Technique 70 points 70 points
Content 95 points 95 points
Practical Demonstration ROV & Submarine Spatial Design
Trial 200 points N/A
Total 8856 / 900 points 560 points
C3.8 Judging Score CardsThe REA Foundation Ltd State and National Finals judging score cards provide detailed information in relation to what the Judges will be looking for. They include key performance indicators which are referred to by the judges in awarding points during judging activities. These can be found in the Appendices at the end of this document.
Reading the score cards carefully is important as they provide critical information for teams as to what needs to be presented for each judging category.
C3.9 Critical regulations7
C3.9.1 Non ComplianceTechnical Regulations attracting time penalties have been identified as being critical regulations. If following specifications compliance AND time given to rectify any infringement (Refer C4.1.4.2), a team’s trial water craft is judged as being NON-COMPLIANT with any critical technical regulation, they WILL incur the corresponding time penalty and be ineligible for the following Engineering Awards:
• Best Engineered• Best Engineering CAD• Best Manufactured Water Craft
C3.9.2 The Critical Technical Regulation Articles for Level 4 Submarine are:T5.1/T5.2/T5.3/T5.4/T5.5/T5.9/T5.10/T6.1
C3.9.3 The Critical Technical Regulation Articles for Level 2 ROV are::T3.1/T3.2Note well: Article numbers are from the 2019 Australian Technical Regulations. Please take extra time to check your water craft doesn’t break any of the above critical Technical Regulations.
6 Level 2 Development Class team points at State Finals7 Not applicable to Level 3 Spatial Design
[Advice]
[Advice]
[Advice]
2019 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations 19
ARTICLE C4 - Specifications Judging (80 Points)
C4.1 General Information
C4.1.1 Competition Class ProvisionsSpecifications judging is only conducted for Level 2 ROV & Level 4 Submarine.
C4.1.2 What Will Be Assessed?Specification judging is a detailed inspection process where the trial ready watercraft is assessed for compliance with the SUBS in Schools Australian Technical Regulations. Refer to the specification judging score card for scoring details.
C4.1.3 Team PreparationTeams MUST ensure that their trial ready watercraft is complete and ready for specification judging before they are submitted. Notice is also drawn to the critical technical regulations, refer ARTICLE C3.9.
C4.1.4 Judging Process / ProcedureTeams begin specifications judging with a full allocation of points. Any infringements of the Technical Regulation articles, on the watercraft WILL result in point’s being deducted as detailed in the Technical Regulations. There are two parts to the specification judging process.
C4.1.4.1 Specifications Compliance JudgingThis is conducted within the confines of parc fermé, where the Scrutineers will check trial ready watercraft for compliance to the Technical Regulations. Teams will be present during compliance judging to handle their watercraft and demonstrate features to the scrutineers.
C4.1.4.2 Rectifying Critical Regulation Failure8
Teams that have been judged during initial specifications compliance to have incurred a critical regulation failure through non-compliance with a Technical Rule attracting a Time Penalty, WILL be provided with a special 20 minute watercraft service time, prior to the commencement of trials. If during this service time the water craft can be modified so as to comply with the failed regulation/s, the Time Penalty/ies WILL be removed without being classified as having incurred a critical regulation infringement. However, the points’ penalty WILL still apply.
C4.1.4.3 Specifications Compliance FeedbackWhere time permits, each team WILL be scheduled a period of time for a review of any specification infringements ruled. This will generally be conducted at a team’s Trade Display or other area identified in pre-competition event documentation. The Lead Scrutineer WILL highlight to the team any technical regulation infringements and provide necessary explanations. The team is then given an opportunity to explain to the Judges why they feel any identified infringements SHOULD be considered as permissible.
Following the team’s explanation, the Lead Scrutineer MAY choose to reverse the original decision or uphold it. No further discussion will then be permitted at that point. Teams MAY lodge a Grievance as per ARTICLE C4.2 and ARTICLE C11.
C4.2 Specification Judging Decision AppealsTeams MAY ONLY appeal the specification judges’ decision if they believe their justification for regulation compliance SHOULD be accepted. The procedure for submitting technical regulation infringements is outlined in ARTICLE C11.
8 Not applicable to Level 3 Spatial Design
Specifications Judging | Article C4
2019 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations20
Article C5 | Engineering Judging
ARTICLE C5 - Engineering Judging (200/ 150 Points)
C5.1 General Information
C5.1.1 Competition Class ProvisionsEngineering judging is conducted for all levels of competition. However, Level 3 Spatial Design does NOT undertake Manufacturing judging.
C5.1.2 Team PreparationC5.1.2.1 CAD & Manufacturing9 JudgingA laptop with the CAD & CAM/CNC software used by the team and with all CAD part and assembly data MUST to be taken to engineering judging. (Refer ARTICLE C2.10.8.1).
Teams undertaking Level 3 Spatial Design, WILL be provided with the appropriate VR tecnologies enabling them to demonstrate their accommodation space design to judges.
Other items MAY also be taken to help the team explain any engineering or concepts. The engineering judges will not have access to the team trade display for judging purposes. Preparation SHOULD include careful reading of the score card. The key performance indicators describe what the judges will be looking for.
C5.1.2.2 Engineering Design Process Judging• Teams SHOULD thoroughly document their Design Process in their
Engineering Portfolio.
C5.1.3 Judging Process / ProcedureC5.1.3.1 CAD & Manufacturing9 JudgingCAD & Manufacturing8 will be judged via scheduled judging interview sessions that will focus on the Key Criteria. These are informal interviews where Judges will ask teams to demonstrate their CAD and CAM/CNC9 work and query them on what they have done. This will be supported by secondary evidence contained within a team’s Engineering Portfolio and Engineering Compliance Booklet. The assessment of the geometry and surface finish of the final product8 will be judged during a separate ‘closed to teams’ session.
C5.1.3.1.1 Level 2 - ROV & Level 4 - SubmarineThe CAD judging will be conducted using the teams laptop. The judges will assess the model through the relevant CAD software.
C5.1.3.1.2 Level 3 - Spatial DesignThe CAD judging will be conducted using VR technology. The team will be required to show the judges through their design using the supplied VR Goggles (HTC Vive Pro).
C5.1.3.2 Engineering Design ProcessEngineering Design Process will be judged from the information documented in a team’s Engineering Portfolio. Teams will be awarded points as per the key performance indicators shown on the Engineering Design Process score card.
C5.2 Key Criteria
C5.2.1 CAD (65/70 points)Refer to the Engineering/CAD judging score card for key performance indicator information.
9 Not applicable to Level 3 Spatial Design
2019 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations 21
C5.2.1.1 What Will Be Assessed - Levels 2 & 4The engineering judges will assess the team’s use of CAD technologies, analysis, rendering, technical merit as well as comparing the CAD model with the finished product. Specific areas to be assessed are:
• Application of CAD
• CAD Organisation
• CAD Based Analysis
• Overall Design Technical Merit
• CAD Model vs Finished Product
• Orthographic (Engineering Compliance Booklet)
• Rendering (Engineering Compliance Booklet)
C5.2.1.2 What Will Be Assessed - Level 3The engineering judges will assess the team’s use of CAD technologies and understanding of human ergonomics to design a functional space.
• Design Intent
• Model Detail
• Explanation of Model Layout
• Understanding of Human Ergonomics
• Use of Human Mannequins to Highlight Design Intent
• Engineering Drawings
• Redndering
C5.2.2 Manufacturing10 (65 points)Refer to the Engineering/Manufacturing judging score card for key performance indicator information.
C5.2.2.1 What Will Be Assessed? The engineering judges will assess the team’s use of CNC and other technologies when manufacturing their water craft body and other components, the technical merit as well as comparing the geometry and surface finish quality of the final product. Specific areas to be assessed are:
• Application of CAM/CNC
• Manufacturing process caps and sail
• Manufacturing process internal components
• Tolerance / Quality Control
• Overall Manufacturing Technical Merit
• Quality of Finished Product - Geometry/Form
• Quality of Finished Product - Surface finish
C5.2.3 Design Process (70/80 points)Refer to the Engineering/Design Process judging score card/s for key performance indicator information.
C5.2.3.1 What Will Be Assessed? The engineering judges will assess the team’s Design Process which includes all stages from identifying the requirements of the brief through to the final design. Specific areas to be assessed are:
• Requirements Analysis10 / Design Specification11
• Ideas
• Development
• Analysis
• Physical Testing10
• Evaluation
• Overall Design Technical Merit10 Not applicable to Level 3 Spatial Design11 Not applicable to Level 2 Large ROV & Level 4 Submarine
Engineering Judging | Article C5
2019 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations22
Article C6 | Portfolio Judging
ARTICLE C6 - Portfolio Judging (130 Points)
C6.1 General Information
C6.1.1 Competition Class ProvisionsPortfolio judging is conducted for all levels of the competition
C6.1.2 Team PreparationEach team MUST prepare a Portfolio as per ARTICLE C2.10.2. A team’s Portfolio tells the story of the team’s journey including the knowledge and skills they have acquired along the way. It is considered a professional business document so attention to detail is paramount. Most importantly, teams need to read the Portfolio judging score cards carefully to ensure that all areas to be assessed are included within the context of their Portfolio.
C6.1.3 Portfolio StructureTo streamline the judging of team Portfolios, teams MUST structure this as TWO separate documents containing content as follows.
C6.1.3.1 Enterprise Portfolio• Project Management
• Marketing, Skill Development & Linking Skills with Careers
C6.1.3.2 Engineering Portfolio• Engineering Design Process
Each Portfolio MUST be clearly labelled as either Enterprise or Engineering with the team name and each contain a maximum:
• 7 pages including the front cover for Level 2 Development Class teams
• 11 pages including the front cover for all other teams
Portfolio Design elements will be assessed throughout the teams’ entire two Portfolios. For more information on the suggested page content of the Portfolios, refer to C14.5 -C14.7.
C6.1.4 Judging Process / ProcedureThe Portfolios will be assessed initially behind closed doors and conducted before the commencement of scheduled judging sessions. For some key criterion, this will be supported by a verification interview of team members at the Trade Display or other area identified in pre-competition event documentation. Teams SHOULD have a copy of their Portfolios on their Trade Display at all times. Teams are required to submit several copies of their Portfolios for pre-assessment at Event Check-in. Failure to submit the required number and correct Portfolio size will result in penalties being applied.
C6.1.5 Portfolio PenaltiesThe Chair of Judges reserves the right to apply penalties for teams who:
• DO NOT submit the correct number of copies required for judging [10pt Penalty]• DO NOT provide copies in the mandated A3 size [10pt Penalty]• DO NOT structure their Portfolio as per C6.1.3 [10pt Penalty]• DO NOT submit electronic copies as per C2.9.1 to C2.9.3 [10pt Penalty]
C6.2 Key Criteria
C6.2.1 Project Management & Linking Skills with Careers (80 points)Refer to the Portfolio/Project Management score card for detailed point scoring and key performance indicator information. There will be NO verification interview required for this key criteria.
2019 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations 23
C6.2.1.1 What will be Assessed? Project Management MUST be contained within Section A of each team’s 11 page Enterprise Portfolio in order to assess the following specific areas.
• Team Roles & Tasks
• Scope & Time Management
• Resource & Risk Management
• Internal Communication
• Stakeholder Engagement
• Skill Development for Future Careers
• Evaluation
C6.2.2 Portfolio Design (50 points)Refer to the Portfolio/Design score card for detailed point scoring and key performance indicator information. There will be NO verification interview required for this key criterion.
C6.2.2.1 What Will Be Assessed? Judges will review each team’s two 11 page Enterprise and Engineering Portfolios in order to assess the following specific areas.
• Production Quality of Materials
• Production Quality of Content
• Content Organisation
• Layout Design Typography
• Photos & Images
• Creative Graphics (Visual effects and infographics)
• Editing/Proofreading
• Referencing/Plagiarism
• Writing & Readability
ARTICLE C7 - Marketing Judging (11012/125 Points)C7.1 General Information
C7.1.1 Competition Class ProvisionsMarketing judging is conducted for all levels of the competition.
C7.1.2 Who Needs to AttendAll team members MUST be present at Trade Booth judging.
C7.1.3 Team PreparationEach team MUST prepare an Enterprise Portfolio as per ARTICLE C2.10.2 and a Trade Display as per ARTICLE C2.10.5. Some Branding elements MUST be contained within each team’s 7/11 page Enterprise Portfolio. Others will be assessed within a team’s Trade Display. Read the Marketing Score Cards carefully to ensure that all areas to be assessed are included within the context of their Portfolio and Trade Display.
C7.1.4 Judging Process / ProcedureThe branding and trade display criteria from the Marketing Score Card will be assessed primarily within the trade display with secondary evidence on logo development assessed from within a team’s Enterprise Portfolio. The Judges will introduce themselves then ask questions to help them find certain content and/or seek further explanation.
Teams SHOULD have a copy of their Enterprise Portfolio on their Trade Display at all times. Teams MAY be asked to step away from the trade display so judges can gain first impressions and concur before asking them to return to their display.
12 Level 2 Development Class points at State Finals
Marketing Judging | Article C7
2019 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations24
Article C7 | Marketing Judging
C7.2 Key Criteria
C7.2.1 Branding (60 points)Refer to the Marketing/Branding score card for detailed point scoring and key performance indicator information.
C7.2.1.1 What Will Be Assessed? The Marketing judges will assess a team’s branding primarily within their Trade Display. As a secondary source of evidence, the judges will also access a team’s Portfolio to assess logo development. Specific areas to be assessed are:
• Team Name
• Logo Development
• Final Logo Design
• Logo Application
• Team Branding
• Media Exposure
• Team Sponsors & REA Corporate Partners ROI
• Team Uniform
• Team Presence
• Team Knowledge
C7.2.2 Trade Display (5013 / 65 points)Refer to the Marketing/Trade Display score card for detailed point scoring and key performance indicator information.
C7.2.2.1 What Will Be Assessed?A trade display is to visually ‘sell’ the team’s most important key messages in snapshot form for assessment and event promotion. The Marketing judges will assess a team’s trade display content and structure. Specific areas to be assessed are:
• Product Display
• Information Design
• Use of ICTs
• Visual Design & Impact
• Structural Design14
• Materials Selection & Use
C7.3 Trade Display ArrangementsC7.3.1 Recommended Design Considerations
1. Costs: Determine a budget and stick to it. Seek sponsorship of cash or donations of booth elements.
2. Research: Innovative ideas and current trends online and/or seek a mentor in this space.
3. Criteria: Read carefully the Trade Display scorecard and conditions (C7.7) within this document.
4. Design: Use 3D CAD to create a digital mock-up.
5. Consider:• Dimensions; Recommended maximum internal build dimensions of
provided booths/backboards
• Portability; Think flat-pack, modular, lightweight, pop-up, for ease of set-up and transportation
• Materials; Consider fabric/textile options which are easier to transport, less prone to damage and more environmentally friendly as opposed to corflute/vinyl equivalents.
13 Level 2 Development Class Points at State Finals14 Not applicable to Development Class Teams at State Finals
2019 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations 25
• Sustainability; Reuse and recycle, particularly frameworks that can be reconfigured with new stretch or re-attachable banner materials.
• Lighting; Incorporate lighting to accentuate design features and brighten key areas of your exhibit such as product displays and promotional materials.
• Storage; Design options for storage of top-up Marketing material. Use shelves to attractively organise products.
6. Develop: An optional document that charts your team’s creative approach, design considerations (space, purpose), transport limitations (cost and, assembly constraints) and environmental impact to inform judges and justify your decisions.
C7.3.2 Jetta Express SponsorshipJetta Express – an Australian excess baggage company – generously offer National Final teams FREE shipping of Trade Display assets from a team’s home state capital city to the event venue and return. Teams wishing to take advantage of this offer MUST adhere to strict guidelines including maximum weights and dimensions. When designing Trade Displays, teams SHOULD give thoughtful consideration to the construction material used which will impact portability and transportation costs. A copy of these guidelines can be downloaded from the REA website at: http://rea.org.au/f1-in-schools/for-teams/competition-documents/
C7.3.3 Trade Display Shell Scheme InformationAll team display systems will include 1 x 240-volt power supply but teams will need to provide their own power boards, if required, which MUST have a valid electrical safety test tag. At National Finals ONLY, Trade Displays will also contain integrated lighting and fascia’s.
C7.3.3.1 Professional ClassAt State and National Finals, REA Foundation Ltd. will provide each Professional Class team with a self-contained shell scheme exhibition style display space. Dimensions vary depending on the type of shell scheme provided and the quality of build supplied. In addition, the dimensions can vary between end displays sharing one side wall and internal displays sharing two side walls. See Appendix 3.
• Nominal External DimensionsWalling: Nominally 2000mm long x 1000mm wide x 2400m high.
• Maximum Internal Display Dimensions1940mm long x 960mm wide x 2360mm high.
C7.3.3.2 Development ClassAt State Finals, Development Class teams will be provided with back boards ONLY, along with a trestle style table. Use of the trestle table by Development Class teams is compulsory and teams are required to provide their own tablecloth.
At National Finals, Development Class teams will be provided with a full, self-contained shell scheme exhibition style display space but NO trestle table.
• Nominal External DimensionsNominally 2000mm long x 2400mm high.
• Maximum Internal Display DimensionsBackboards: 1800mm long x 750mm wide x 2400mm high.
Trestle Tables: Approximately 1800mm long x 730mm high x 750mm wide
C7.3.4 Set upA time period will be scheduled for teams to set-up their trade displays, usually after event check-in and prior to the commencement of judging. Setup will be conducted simultaneously by all teams. A time limit of 2hrs maximum will be enforced to avoid penalties.
Marketing Judging | Article C7
2019 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations26
Article C8 | Marketing Judging
C7.3.5 ConditionsTeams MUST comply with the following conditions:
• Level 2 Development Class Teams MUST adhere to restrictions regarding Trade Displays for State Finals. See APPENDIX 2.
• Trade Displays MUST be fully fitted out for judging at the end of the 2hr setup where upon photos will be taken.
• NO other items can be added to the display (excluding top-up marketing items) from this point forward and penalties will be applied for teams breaching this rule.
• REA Foundation Ltd. will instruct teams to remove or alter any display inclusions considered to be a safety hazard or inappropriate, including rubbish, bags etc. which are not part of the display.
• NO part of the team’s completed trade display is allowed to protrude beyond the physical dimensions of their allocated space. This includes anything that might protrude above the display space highest point e.g. flags, banner, balloons. Teams will be required to remove items infringing this rule and penalties will apply.
• Teachers or adults are NOT permitted to assist teams with the set-up of Trade Displays. All displays MUST be designed so that adult assistance is not required for setting up. This includes power, lighting and height issues. Step or full sized ladders will not be provided, therefore teams need to factor this in to their set-up requirements if they cannot supply their own. All adults (excluding officials and judges) will be required to remain out of the venue where Trade Displays are located until the setup is complete.
• Teams MAY provide their own display internal walls and tables/cabinets so long as they strictly fit within the display system provided. No part of a team’s substitute internal walling system can encroach beyond or above the walls of the display system provided by the competition organisers and systems MUST be designed so that NO part of the provided display system (including the fascia framework) requires dismantling.
• Teams MUST NOT play sounds or music at their Trade Display at a loud volume. Any sound or music played MUST be strictly relevant to the project such as commentary on a video produced by the team and not just for ‘entertainment’ value.
• Chairs are NOT permitted in or near the displays unless it is a stool specially designed for the display, and this MUST sit within the volume of the display’s external dimensions.
• Display space will be pre-allocated to teams by the event organisers. Teams MUST use the space allocated and displays cannot be repositioned by any team unless there is an obstruction to the display or an issue of WHS and this MUST first be approved by the Competition Director or Chair of Judges.
• At National Finals teams MUST design their displays to fit within the supplied booth without requiring the removal of the booth fascia. Removal of the fascia will incur a penalty. See ARTICLE C8.1.7.
• From arrival at the competition venue until the official Trade Display Assembly Period, teams are NOT permitted to pre-construct nor assemble ANY part of their Trade Display anywhere within the premises of the competition venue including ANY venue car park.
• Displays MUST be manned by at least one team member at all times excluding judging sessions. When a team is undertaking a judging session, the teacher or a supporting adult SHOULD supervise the display to ensure security. Note that competitions are generally open to the public.
C7.3.6 Trade Display PenaltiesThe Chair of Judges reserves the right to apply penalties for teams who:
• DO NOT comply with Development Class restrictions [10pt Penalty]• DO NOT complete their set-up within the 2hr time limit [10pt Penalty]• DO NOT leave their stand in a safe state [10pt Penalty]• DO NOT clear their pit and surrounding area of all rubbish [10pt Penalty]• DO NOT contain their display within the booth volume [10pt Penalty]• DO NOT comply with added content restrictions [10pt Penalty]• DO NOT design their display to enable fit-out without removal of fascia [10pt Penalty]• Construct ANY part of their display at the venue prior to scheduled build [10pt Penalty]
2019 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations 27
ARTICLE C8 - Verbal Presentation Judging (165 Points)
C8.1 General Information
C8.1.1 Competition Class ProvisionsVerbal Presentation judging is conducted for all levels of the competition
C8.1.2 Who Needs to Attend?All team members MUST be present at and contribute to the Verbal Presentation.
C8.1.3 Judging Process / ProcedureVerbal presentation judging is scheduled for the same duration as other judging sessions, usually 20 – 30 minutes. Teams will be given 5 minutes at the start of their time to set-up and test their laptop and any other presentation technologies and resources. The team will inform the judges when they are ready to begin. The judges start timing the 8-minute duration and will provide a discreet time warning signal when one minute of presentation time remains. The team will be asked to cease presenting when the time limit has been reached. At the conclusion of the team’s presentation time, the judges MAY choose to provide some feedback and / or ask any clarifying questions they feel necessary. However, assessment can ONLY be based on the team’s 8-minute presentation. Verbal presentations MAY be filmed for judge’s review or promotional and future resource purposes.
C8.1.4 Team PreparationEach team is required to prepare a verbal presentation as per the requirements at ARTICLE C2.10.6. Any multimedia content, slides etc. MUST be saved on and shown using the team’s own laptop along with VGA and HDMI cables. Teams need to have all presentation resources tested and ready for verbal presentation judging. Most importantly, teams SHOULD read the verbal presentation judging score card carefully to ensure their presentation features all elements and content that the verbal presentation judges will be looking for.
C8.1.5 Verbal Presentation Judging Provisions.REA Foundation Ltd. will provide a dedicated private space, such as a small meeting room, where each team will deliver their presentation to the judges. This space will include a data projector and screen or large TV monitor. Multimedia sound systems MAY not always be available and teams MAY have to bring their own portable speakers. If available these will be in fixed positions but usually with sufficient cable length to allow teams some freedom for choosing where they wish to locate their laptop. A single table will also be made available with its use and location in the presentation space being optional.
C8.1.6 Verbal Presentation Video RecordingsThe verbal presentations of all teams MAY be video recorded by the REA Foundation Ltd. for the purpose of judging review and / or post event publicity and promotional purposes for SUBS in Schools.
C8.2 Key Criteria
C8.2.1 Technique (70 points)Refer to the Verbal Presentation/Technique score card for detailed point scoring and key performance indicator information.
C8.2.1.1 What Will Be Assessed? • Presentation Energy
• Team Contribution
• Visual Aids
• Audience Engagement
• Articulation
• Structure
• Use of Time
Verbal Presentation Judging | Article C8
2019 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations28
Article C9 | Trials
C8.2.2 Content (95 points)Refer to the Verbal Presentation/Content score card for detailed point scoring and key performance indicator information.
C8.2.2.1 What Will Be Assessed?• Team Objectives
• Description of the Product
• Innovation / Refinement
• Collaboration
• Learning Outcomes
• Future Career Aspirations and Research
• Overall Clarity
ARTICLE C9 - Trials (200 Points)
C9.1 Trials - ROV & SubmarineThe Trials are time limited events in which teams will be required to perform certain tasks or manoeuvres with their water craft in order to score points.
C9.2 General Information
C9.2.1 Demonstration ProcessTeams will be scheduled with one or more time slots in order to complete their Trials. Trials are expected to be conducted in swimming pools with maximum depths of approximately 2 metres.
C9.2.2 Who Needs to Attend?All team members MUST be present at the Practical Demonstration Trial events.
C9.2.3 Time Penalties for TrialsC9.2.3.1 Specifications ComplianceIf following specifications compliance judging AND time given to rectify any infringement (Refer ARTICLE C4.1.4.2), a team’s trial ready water craft is judged as being NON-COMPLIANT with any critical technical regulation, a Time Penalty of 30 seconds per infringement will apply to voyage trials. The time penalty is a reduction to the time allowed to complete the voyage trials.
C9.2.3.2 Human InterventionIf at any point during a trial the trial judge or a team member is required to physically intervene with the water craft, the team will incur a 30 second penalty for each intervention. Trial judges MAY intervene at their discretion or by request from the team. This time penalty includes interventions for the purpose of repairs. For Level 2 competition, teams MAY only interact with the ROV to remove an object once the ROV is on the surface of the water, and at the required location. Any other interaction will incur a 30 second penalty. The time penalty is a reduction to the time allowed to complete the current trial.
C9.2.4 Safety ChecksAll water craft will be checked for safety prior to conducting trials. If the judges have any safety concerns, teams MUST rectify the issue before they are allowed to start the trial.Unresolved safety concerns WILL prohibit the team from attempting the trial and WILL result in zero points being awarded for the trial.
C9.2.5 Did Not Start (DNS)Water craft deemed unsafe or ineligible to start the trial by judges will be classified as Did Not Start (DNS) in trial events.
C9.2.6 Did Not Finish (DNF)The following scenarios result in a DNF:
• Repairs that exceed 15 minutes.• Water craft unable to finish the course.• A DNF result signals the finish of a trial event. Teams will still receive any points
gained prior to the DNF result, but will not be able to continue and will receive the minimum score for trial time (if relevant)..
[30 sec Time Penalty]
[30 sec Time Penalty]
2019 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations 29
C9.2.7 Manual / Pilot StartsAt least one team member (pilot) MUST be appointed for operating the teams’ water craft. The pilot/s MUST stand within the dedicated starting area. However they are free to move as necessary while the water craft is underway
C9.2.8 Finish Line ManagementAt least one member of the team MUST be appointed as responsible for managing the finish line and retrieving the water craft from the water.
C9.2.9 Start Line Water Craft stagingOne team member MAY be appointed as being responsible for ‘staging’ the water craft. System checks MAY be performed during this time. However, prior to trial commencement, the watercraft MUST have a portion of the PVC body visible above the waterline and SHALL NOT be supported by a team member. The watercraft cannot start moving until this is achieved. After the 2 minute staging time is exhausted, if the watercraft is not ready to commence the trial a DNS result will be recorded.
C9.3 Level 2 Trial Procedure (ROV Class)For level 2 competition, the ROV will be required to travel underneath the surface of the water and perform a series of tasks. The ROV SHOULD be designed in order to competently complete these tasks.
C9.3.1 Trial Order (ROV Class)• Flotation and Water Column Positioning Trial (4 minute maximum)• Submerged Manoeuvring Trial (4 minute maximum)• Retrieval Voyage Trial (Timed)
Maximum time for the Retrieval Voyage Trial will be defined during a competition briefing, expected to be 6 to 8 minutes.
C9.3.2 Retrieval Voyage Layout Teams MAY navigate the area and complete the tasks in whatever order they choose.
C9.3.2.1 WreckThe simulated wreck will be comprised of a wheelie bin turned on its back with the lid open on the course floor. A code will be printed and placed inside and at the base of the bin.
Trials | Article C9
TYPICAL AREA LAYOUT
2019 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations30
C9.3.2.2 ObjectsThe ROV will retrieve THREE objects from the bottom of the pool. These objects will vary in size and shape.
Two of these objects will be attached to a ring suspended 100mm above the object, the other object will be resting on the bottom of the pool.
C9.3.2.3 Button Activation
The ROV MUST locate and activate a button under the water. The button “activation” will be simulated by an element of the ROV fully penetrating a horizontal hole in a shaft (visual confirmation). The shaft will be 100mm in depth and 30mm in diameter (no force activation required).
C9.3.2.4 Trial ProcedureThe trial events will be conducted using the following basic procedure:
1. Teams attempt trials in the order as shown in the competition program.
2. One team member to manage start.
3. The team is allowed 2 minutes to prepare the ROV on the water surface for the trial start.
4. Trial begins on judges instruction to release, with the ROV on the surface in the designated start location.
5. Judge manages and records TRIAL TIME, adds any incurred time penalties and calls time if necessary.
6. Team member at finish removes the ROV from the water concluding the trial event.
7. ROV servicing/repairs conducted where necessary.
8. Additional trial attempts MAY be conducted using the same process as above according to the schedule and available time.
9. If multiple trial attempts are made, the highest scoring trial score will count for that trial.
Article C9 | Trials
2019 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations 31
C9.4 Level 2 Trial Scoring (ROV Class)
C9.4.1 Flotation and Water Column Positioning Trial (4 minute maximum)• Float on surface and hold position 5 Points• Sit on bottom and hold position 5 Points• Hover at mid depth and hold position 5 Points• Return to surface and hold position 5 Points
C9.4.2 Submerged Manoeuvring Trial (4 minute maximum)• Move ahead 5 Points• Move astern 5 Points• Turn to port 5 Points• Turn to starboard 5 Points
C9.4.3 Retrieval Voyage Trial (8 minute maximum)C9.4.3.1 Visual Confirmation 50 PointsThe ROV will locate a simulated wreck and capture visual information of the wreck interior. The ROV will need to capture a 5-digit code from inside the wreck. The code will need to be presented to the judges during or immediately after the timed Trial event. 10 Points will be awarded for each correct digit in its correct place. Refer to ARTICLE C9.3.2.1 for wreck details.
C9.4.3.2 Objects 30 PointsThe ROV MUST collect these objects and deliver them to retrieval deck on the surface of the water. Teams may only retrieve the objects from their ROV once the ROV has broken the water surface and is within 300mm of the retrieval deck. 10 Points will be awarded for each object delivered to the deck.
C9.4.3.3 Button Activation 20 Points20 Points will be awarded for successful button activation.
C9.4.3.4 Retrieval Voyage Timing 60 PointsTeams will be awarded points based on their time to complete the voyage. Time begins when the ROV is released and concludes when the ROV completes its final task. Teams will be ranked by the number of tasks completed and where a tied result exists, the fastest time will be used to rank the teams. See the sample ranking matrix below. Points will be awarded based on finish placings. To receive timing points a minimum of 3 tasks MUST be completed. Points are distributed as below:
DNF6th
and below5th 4th 3rd 2nd 1st
10 30 35 40 45 50 60
Sample Ranking
Team Tasks Completed Trial Time Rank Points
Team 1 5 7:20 1 60
Team 2 5 7:30 2 50
Team 3 4 7:00 3 45
Team 4 4 7:15 4 40
Team 5 4 7:35 5 35
Team 6 4 7:50 6 30
Team 7 3 6:00 7 30
Team 8 3 6:35 8 30
Team 9 3 7:00 9 30
Team 10 3 DNF 10 10
Trials | Article C9
2019 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations32
C9.4.3.5 3 Team Member PilotsA minimum of 3 team members MUST be used to control the ROV during the voyage trial. Each pilot SHOULD complete at least one task.
C9.5 Level 4 Trial Procedure (Submarine Class)For level 4 competition, the submarine will be required to perform a number of trials and then manoeuvre around a set course on a voyage. Teams will progress through the four trials in the order listed.
C9.5.1 Trial Order (Submarine Class)• Surface Manoeuvring Trial• Flotation And Ballasting Trial• Submerged Manoeuvring Trial • Timed Way point Voyage
C9.5.2 Way Point Voyage LayoutThe layout will be revealed to teams on the day of the competition. Below is an example of a course layout, this shows the course route but does not show the depth at each point.
C9.5.2.1 Voyage GatesThe route is marked by gates indicating the specified way points. These gates include a port and starboard upright, and their upper and lower limits are marked by horizontal beams. The required depth of the submarine will vary across the voyage.
C9.5.2.2 Gate DesignThe gate is designed with an upper and lower limit, stipulating the depth at which the sub MUST pass through. The upper limit is designed with a break to allow trailing aerials to pass through.
Front View of submarine passing through gate Top View of submarine passing through gate
C9.5.2.3 Gate ContactTeams will be required to navigate their submarine through each gate without the submarine making contact with the gate(with the exception of the trailing aerial). The water craft MUST be entirely submerged whilst passing through each gate. Teams will receive points for each gate successfully completed.
[10pt Penalty if 2 members used][20pt Penalty if 1 member used]
Article C9 | Trials
2019 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations 33
C9.5.2.4 DockingTeams will be required to park their submarine in a dock with nominally zero trim and heel, to signal the start and finish of the trial. The submarine MUST be fully contained and be stationary within the dock to start and finish the trial. Teams will receive 10 points for successfully leaving and returning to the designated dock(s). Alternatively, teams that cannot dock can start and finish in an alternate area, announced during the competition, to stop the timer.
The dock dimensions are as follows:
500mm Width x 1200mm Length.
C9.5.2.5 Trial ProcedureThe Trial events will be conducted using the following procedure:
1. Teams attempt trials in the order as shown in the competition program.
2. One team member to manage dock.
3. The team is allowed 2 minutes to prepare the submarine for the voyage in the dock.
4. Trial begins on judges instruction with the submarine floating on the surface in the dock with nominally zero trim and heel.
5. Judge manages and records TRIAL TIME, adds any incurred time penalties and calls time if necessary.
6. Team member at finish removes the submarine as directed by the judge concluding the trial event.
7. Submarine servicing/repairs conducted where necessary.
8. Additional trial attempts MAY be conducted using the same process as above according to the schedule and available time.
9. If multiple trial attempts are made, the highest scoring trial score will count for that trial.
C9.6 Level 4 Trial Scoring
C9.6.1 Surface Manoeuvring Trial (4 minute maximum) • Move ahead 5 Points• Move astern 5 Points• Turn to port 5 Points• Turn to starboard 5 Points
C9.6.2 Flotation And Ballasting Trial (4 minute maximum) • Float at level trim and minimal heel indefinitely 5 Points• Ballast to mid depth and hold position indefinitely 5 Points• Sit on bottom indefinitely 5 Points• Return to surface with level trim and minimal heel 5 Points
C9.6.3 Submerged Manoeuvring Trial (4 minute maximum) • Porpoise (with constant slow ahead speed dive, level out at mid depth,
resurface) – aim to demonstrate hydroplanes 10 Points• At mid depth, move astern 10 Points• At mid depth, turn to port 10 Points• At mid depth, turn to starboard 10 Points
C9.6.4 Timed Way Point Voyage (6 minute maximum)• Accuracy - Passing through gates going forward to score 60 Points (10 per gate)• Departure and Arrival - Docking 10 Points• Time 50 Points
Teams will be awarded points based on how quickly they can complete the voyage. Time begins when the water craft is positioned in the dock and concludes when the water craft reaches the finishing position. Teams will be ranked by the number of gates successfully navigated and where a tied result exists, the fastest time will be used to rank the teams.
Trials | Article C9
2019 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations34
See the sample ranking matrix below. Points will be awarded based on finish placings. To receive timing points a minimum of 3 gates MUST be successfully navigated. Points are distributed as below:
DNF6th
and below5th 4th 3rd 2nd 1st
10 20 25 30 35 40 50
Sample Ranking
Team Gates Completed Trial Time Rank Points
Team 1 6 5:20 1 50
Team 2 6 5:30 2 40
Team 3 5 5:00 3 35
Team 4 5 5:15 4 30
Team 5 4 5:35 5 25
Team 6 4 5:50 6 20
Team 7 3 4:00 7 20
Team 8 3 4:35 8 20
Team 9 3 5:00 9 20
Team 10 3 DNF 10 10
At the judges discretion, depending on environmental constraints, penalty free assistance via manual turning of boats may be allowed during voyage.
C9.6.5 3 Member PilotsA minimum of 3 team members MUST be used to control the submarine during the trial voyage. Each pilot SHOULD navigate through at least one gate.
C9.7 Pre-Competition Testing EvidenceIf teams fail to complete a trial(excluding voyage) they may submit video evidence of their submarine completing these tasks in testing. For every task completed in the video teams will receive 25% of the total points available for that specific task.
ARTICLE C10 - Water Craft Repairs / Servicing
C10.1 Water craft repairs
C10.1.1 Judges’ DiscretionAll damage issues and related repair work during trials is at the Judge’s discretion and MAY be referred to the scrutineering Judges and/or Chair of Judges for a final decision.
C10.1.2 Removing/Replacing PartsNo parts/components can be removed or replaced on a watercraft during trials, except in the case of a repair.
C10.1.3 RepairsC10.1.3.1 Engineering DeficiencyIf the watercraft sustains damage during trials it MAY be repaired within the allocated trial time limit. It will then be allowed to continue the trial for the remaining time. The water craft MAY only continue if all components are fitted.
• Level 2 ROVThe trial will recommence from the ROV’s trial starting position.
• Level 4 SUBSThe trial will recommence from the last gate that was passed prior to the submarine being removed from the course.
C10.1.3.2 Non-Engineering DeficiencyIf the judges rule that damage sustained was not due to engineering deficiencies, immediate repairs will be permitted without penalty.
[10pt Penalty if 2 members used][20pt Penalty if 1 member used]
Article C10 | Water Craft Repairs / Servicing
2019 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations 35
ARTICLE C11 - Grievances
C11.1 Procedure
C11.1.1 Specifications Compliance Related
1. Following the Specifications Compliance judging and prior to the commencement of trials, teams found to have failed any critical regulations will be handed a form listing all infringements.
a. This document WILL NOT contain infringements of non-critical regulations.
b. It is the responsibility of team members to read, identify and respond to all of the infringements relating to failed critical regulations.
2. As per ARTICLE C4.1.4.2, teams will be given a special 20 minutes water craft servicing time to modify the water craft so as to comply with the failed regulation/s. Students will need to complete the form provided and hand it back to the supervising Scrutineer within the allocated 20 minutes.
3. Scrutineers will then recheck the water craft for compliance and teams will be advised of the outcome as soon as possible thereafter.
4. SHOULD a team be dissatisfied with the decision of the Lead Scrutineer, an appeal MAY be submitted in writing by the advertised deadline using the official on-line Grievance Form. Refer ARTICLE C2.4.1.5.
5. The Chair of Judges will discuss the appeal with the scrutineers and MAY seek additional advice from REA Foundation Ltd. regulation authorities. The Chair of Judges will then meet with the team, to discuss the appeal and explain the final decision.
C11.1.2 Non Specifications RelatedSubmitted by the advertised deadline using the official on-line Grievance Form..
C11.2 Judge’s DecisionThe Chair of Judges decision related to any grievance is final and no further discussion will be entered into.
Grievances | Article C11
2019 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations36
ARTICLE C12 - Judges
C12.1 OverviewThere will be several teams of judges that form the entire judging panel
Judges are generally higher education and industry experts invited by REA Foundation Ltd. They are selected and appointed to teams based on their qualifications and experience.
All judges undertake a comprehensive briefing prior to the competition and are required to declare any conflicts of interest with respect to the teams they are judging. Where a conflict of interest MAY occur, the judge is required to step back from judging the relevant team/s.
Some judges MAY perform a dual role. For example, undertake the specifications compliance of water craft AND Engineering judging.
Each judging category will have one judge appointed as the Lead Judge.
C12.2 Chair of JudgesAn independent authority appointed by REA Foundation Ltd. to oversee all judging procedures. The Chair of Judges will determine the final judging decision where a grievance has been submitted or other judging issue needs resolution. The Chair of Judges will also preside over a meeting of all Lead Judges to ratify the final results and work with the Competition Director to ensure all scores are entered correctly into a spread sheet to identify awards winners.
C12.3 The Judging Teams
C12.3.1 Specifications JudgesWill scrutinise each water craft with respect to the Australian Technical Regulations.
C12.3.2 Engineering JudgesWill assess each team’s use of CAD/CAM, CNC technologies, quality of manufacture, engineering design process and VR Walk Through.
C12.3.3 Portfolio JudgesPortfolio Judges will assess each team’s portfolio design and project management as per the Portfolio score card.
C12.3.4 Marketing JudgesMarketing Judges will assess each team’s branding and trade display as per the Marketing score card.
C12.3.5 Verbal Presentation JudgesVerbal presentation Judges will assess each team’s presentation technique and content as per the verbal presentation score card.
C12.3.6 Trial JudgesWill oversee and rule on all trial events and any incidents.
C12.3.7 Water Craft Servicing JudgesWater craft Servicing Judges will oversee all water craft service activities and rule on any infringements that MAY occur.
C12.4 Judging DecisionsTHE DECISION OF THE JUDGES IS FINAL.
ARTICLE C13 - Awards
C13.1 Awards CelebrationAt each State and National Final, an Awards Presentation is conducted, the timing of which is included in the Event Programme which is released closer to the event.
At some National Finals, the Awards Presentation is combined with a Gala Dinner Celebration.
C13.2 Participation RecognitionAt State and National Finals, all students, supervising teachers and judges will receive official participation/recognition certificates. These will be provided in the team and judge information packs.
Articles C12 & 13 | Judges / Awards
2019 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations 37
Awards | Article C13
Students participating at a National Final MAY also receive participation medallions presented at the Awards Presentation ceremony.
C13.3 Prizes and Trophies
C13.3.1 State FinalsAt State Finals, teams winning an award will be presented with an A4 certificate only.
C13.3.2 National FinalsAt National Finals, winning teams will be presented with an A3 framed certificate as well as individual award medallions. Post event, all team members will be sent individual A4 certificates.
C13.3.3 Perpetual TrophiesPerpetual Trophies are presented for some but NOT all awards at National Finals ONLY. Teams receiving these trophies are responsible for having their team details engraved upon the trophy using identical material/engraving plates to maintain consistency of appearance. The teacher/school is responsible for returning the trophy to REA Foundation Ltd. prior to the following National Final.
C13.4 List of Awards to be Presented
1. Eligibility for winning awards, requires teams to achieve at least 60% of the total mark used to calculate overall 1st, 2nd and 3rd placings and Category Awards
2. Teams with unresolved Critical Regulation violations will NOT be eligible to win Engineering related awards Refer ARTICLE C3.9.1
3. In situations where there are five or less teams representing a competition class, overall 2nd and 3rd place, along with some category awards MAY NOT be presented. This will be at the discretion of the Chair of Judges.
C13.4.1 Level 2 Large ROV (Development & Professional Class Teams)BEST TRIAL AWARD
The team with highest score for the trial event
BEST ENGINEERED AWARDTeam with highest combined score for:
Criteria 1: Engineering/SpecificationsCriteria 2: Engineering/Computer Aided Design (CAD)
Criteria 3: Engineering/ManufacturingCriteria 4: Engineering/ Design Process
BEST ENGINEERING CAD AWARDTeam with highest score for:
Criteria 2: Engineering/Computer Aided Design (CAD)
BEST MANUFACTURED ROV AWARDTeam with highest score for:
Criteria 3: Engineering/Manufacturing
3RD PLACETeam with the third highest scoring sum of all marking criteria
2ND PLACETeam with the second highest scoring sum of all marking criteria
CHAMPIONSTeam with the highest scoring sum of all marking criteria
C13.4.2 Level 3 Spatial DesignBEST VIRTUAL 3D MODEL
Team with highest combined score for:Criteria 2: Engineering/Computer Aided Design (CAD)
Criteria 4: Engineering/ Design Process
3RD PLACETeam with the third highest scoring sum of all marking criteria
2ND PLACETeam with the second highest scoring sum of all marking criteria
CHAMPIONSTeam with the highest scoring sum of all marking criteria
2019 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations38
C13.4.3 Level 4 SubmarineBEST TRIAL AWARD
The team with highest score for the trial event
BEST ENGINEERED AWARDTeam with highest combined score for:
Criteria 1: Engineering/SpecificationsCriteria 2: Engineering/Computer Aided Design (CAD)
Criteria 3: Engineering/ManufacturingCriteria 4: Engineering/ Design Process
BEST ENGINEERING CAD AWARDTeam with highest score for:
Criteria 2: Engineering/Computer Aided Design (CAD)
BEST MANUFACTURED ROV AWARDTeam with highest score for:
Criteria 3: Engineering/Manufacturing
3RD PLACETeam with the third highest scoring sum of all marking criteria
2ND PLACETeam with the second highest scoring sum of all marking criteria
CHAMPIONSTeam with the highest scoring sum of all marking criteria
C13.4.4 Overall Category AwardsNote: Futher to C13.4/3, category award winners MAY be selected by combining results from all levels of the
competition (excluding Level 2 Development Class).
BEST TEAM PORTFOLIO AWARDTeam with highest combined score for:
Criteria 4: Engineering Design ProcessCriteria 5: Portfolio/Project Management
Criteria 6: Portfolio/Portfolio Design
BEST MANAGED ENTERPRISE AWARDTeam with highest score for:
Criteria 5: Portfolio/Project Management
BEST GRAPHIC DESIGN AWARDTeam with highest combined score for:
Criteria 6: Portfolio/Portfolio DesignCriteria 7: Marketing/Branding
Criteria 8.3, 8.4, 8.5 & 8.6: Marketing/Trade Display
BEST TEAM MARKETING AWARDTeam with highest combined score for:
Criteria 7: Marketing/BrandingCriteria 8: Marketing/Trade Display
Criteria 5.5: Portfolio/Project ManagementCriteria 7.1, 7.2 &7.3: Marketing/Branding
BEST TEAM TRADE DISPLAY AWARDTeam with highest combined score for:
Criteria 8: Marketing/Trade Display
BEST TEAM VERBAL PRESENTATIONTeam with highest combined score for:
Criteria 9: Verbal Presentation/Presentation TechniqueCriteria 10: Verbal Presentation/Content
OUTSTANDING INDUSTRY COLLABORATION AWARDTeam with highest score for:
Criteria 10.5: Verbal Presentation/Content
INNOVATION AWARDTeam with highest score for:
Criteria 10.3 & 10.4: Verbal Presentation /Content
CHAIR OF JUDGES RECOGNITION OF ACHIEVEMENT AWARDDiscretion of the Chair of Judges
Article C13 | Awards
2019 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations 39
ARTICLE C14 - Appendices
C14.1 Development Class Trade Displays
The intent of these amended regulations is to reduce the cost and complexity for Development Class teams participating in the competition. These restrictions ONLY apply to State Final competitions.
At National Final events NO restrictions will be placed upon Development Class teams.
State Final ArrangementsAt State Final events, REA Foundation Ltd will supply Development Class teams with fabric covered backboards with nominal dimensions of 2000mm (L) x 2400mm (H). Development Class teams MAY ONLY use 1800mm of the provided length situated immediately behind a supplied Trestle Table of the same length.
Development Class teams MUST use a REA supplied trestle table at State Final events with nominal dimensions of 1800mm (L) x 750m (W) x 730mm (H). REA do NOT supply table cloths
Within the provided display, Development Class teams will ONLY be permitted to:
1. Display upon the backboard of the display within the identified 1800mm length, using ANY material no thicker than 10mm
2. Display upon the trestle table within the identified area with no separate or combined display item/s being higher than 500mm.
3. Display at the front of the trestle table within the identified 1800mm length using ANY material no thicker than 10mm affixed or resting against the Trestle Table at 90° to the floor.
No other areas/surfaces within the display space provided can be used. The volume underneath the table can be used for storage ONLY but stored contents MUST NOT be visible from front or side view at ANY time throughout the event.
National Final ArrangementsAt National Finals, Development Class teams will be provided with a full shell scheme Trade Display with fascia. No restrictions other than those general conditions listed at ARTICLE C.8.1.6 will apply.
NO Trestle Tables will be supplied to ANY team at a National Final. Teams MUST construct their own display furniture to meet the maximum internal dimensions and fit within the volume of the display space provided.
Appendices | Article C14
2019 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations40
C14.2 Shell Scheme Trade DisplayThe diagrams below shows the nominal external dimensions and maximum internal build dimensions of the shell scheme trade display used for Professional Class teams at state finals and all teams at the National Final.
1940.00
2020.00
960.
00
1020
.00
2400
.00
2360
.00
1940.00
2020.00
960.
00
1020
.00
2400
.00
2360
.00
Article C14 | Appendices
2019 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations 41
C14.3 Awards Matrix - Level 2 & 4 ROV & SUBS
ROV & Submarine Awards
Judging Category Judging Category Criteria Cham
pion
s2n
d Pl
ace
3rd
Plac
eBe
st N
ewco
mer
Best
Eng
inee
red
Best
Eng
inee
ring
CAD
Best
Man
ufac
ture
d W
ater
craf
tBe
st T
rial
Best
Man
aged
Ent
erpr
ise
Best
Tea
m P
ortfo
lioBe
st G
raph
ic D
esig
nBe
st T
eam
Mar
ketin
gBe
st T
eam
Tra
de D
ispl
ayBe
st T
eam
Ver
bal P
rese
ntat
ion
Out
stan
ding
Indu
stry
Col
labo
ratio
nIn
nova
tion
Engineering Specifications 1 SpecificationsEngineering Computer Aided Design 2.1 Application of CAD
2.2 CAD Organisation2.3 CAD Based Analysis2.4 Overall CAD Technical Merit2.5 CAD Model v's Finished Product2.6 Orthographic 2.7 Rendering
Engineering Manufacturing 3.1 Application of CAD/CAM3.2 Manufacturing Process Car Body3.3 Manufacturing Process Other Components3.4 Tolerancing/Quality Control3.5 Manufacturing Technical Merit3.6 Quality of Finished Product - Geometry/Form3.7 Quality of Finished Product - Surface Finish
Engineering Design Process 4.1 Requirements Analysis4.2 Ideas4.3 Development4.4 Analysis4.5 Physical Testing4.6 Evaluation4.7 Overall Design Technical Merit
Portfolio Project Management 5.1 Team Roles & Tasks5.2 Scope & Time Management5.3 Resource & Risk Management5.4 Internal Communications5.5 Stakeholder Engagement5.6 Defence Industry Mentors & Collaborators5.7 Evaluation
Portfolio Portfolio Design 6.1 Production Quality of Materials6.2 Production Quality of Content6.3 Content Organisation6.4 Layout Design6.5 Typography6.6 Photos & Images6.7 Creative Graphics6.8 Editing/Proofreading6.9 Referencing/Plagiarism6.10 Writing & Readability
Marketing Branding 7.1 Team Name7.2 Logo Development7.3 Final Logo Design7.4 Logo Application7.5 Team Branding7.6 Media Exposure7.7 Team Sponsors & REA Corporate Partners ROI7.8 Team Uniform7.9 Team Presence7.10 Team Knowledge
Marketing Trade Display 8.1 Water Craft Display8.2 Information Design8.3 Use of ICT’s8.4 Visual Design & Impact8.5 Structural Design15 8.6 Materials Selection & Use
Verbal Presentation Technique 9.1 Presentation Energy9.2 Team Contribution9.3 Visual Aids9.4 Audience Engagement9.5 Articulation9.6 Structure9.7 Use of Time
Verbal Presentation Content 10.1 Team Objectives10.2 Description of Car Product10.3 Innovation10.4 Refinement10.5 Collaboration10.6 Learning Outcomes10.7 Future Career Aspirations & Research10.8 Overall Clarity
Practical Demonstration Trials 11.1 ROV: Object Retrieval SUB: Course Travel11.2 ROV: Visual Confirmation SUB: Diving11.3 ROV: Button Activation SUB: Docking11.4 ROV & SUB: Timing
15 Not applicable to Development Class teams at State Finals
Appendices | Article C14
2019 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations42
C14.4 Awards Matrix - Level 3 Spatial Design
Spatial Design Awards
Judging Category Judging Category Criteria Cham
pions
2nd P
lace
3rd P
lace
Best
Newc
omer
Best
Virtu
al 3D
Mod
elBe
st Ma
nage
d Ent
erpr
iseBe
st Te
am P
ortfo
lioBe
st Gr
aphic
Des
ignBe
st Te
am M
arke
ting
Best
Team
Trad
e Disp
layBe
st Te
am Ve
rbal
Pres
entat
ionOu
tstan
ding I
ndus
try C
ollab
orati
onInn
ovati
on
Engineering Computer Aided Design 2.1 Design Intent2.2 Model Detaiil2.3 Explanation of Model Layout2.4 Understanding of Human Ergonomics2.5 Use of Human Mannequins to Highlight Design Intent2.6 Evaluation2.7 Overall Design Technical Merit
Engineering Design Process 4.1 Design Specification4.2 Ideas4.3 Development4.4 Analysis4.5 Physical Testing4.6 Evaluation4.7 Overall Design Technical Merit
Portfolio Project Management 5.1 Team Roles & Tasks5.2 Scope & Time Management5.3 Resource & Risk Management5.4 Internal Communications5.5 Stakeholder Engagement5.6 Defence Industry Mentors & Collaborators5.7 Evaluation
Portfolio Portfolio Design 6.1 Production Quality of Materials6.2 Production Quality of Content6.3 Content Organisation6.4 Layout Design6.5 Typography6.6 Photos & Images6.7 Creative Graphics6.8 Editing/Proofreading6.9 Referencing/Plagiarism6.10 Writing & Readability
Marketing Branding 7.1 Team Name7.2 Logo Development7.3 Final Logo Design7.4 Logo Application7.5 Team Branding7.6 Media Exposure7.7 Team Sponsors & REA Corporate Partners ROI7.8 Team Uniform7.9 Team Presence7.10 Team Knowledge
Marketing Trade Display 8.1 Product Display8.2 Information Design8.3 Use of ICT’s8.4 Visual Design & Impact8.5 Structural Design1 8.6 Materials Selection & Use
Verbal Presentation Technique 9.1 Presentation Energy9.2 Team Contribution9.3 Visual Aids9.4 Audience Engagement9.5 Articulation9.6 Structure9.7 Use of Time
Verbal Presentation Content 10.1 Team Objectives10.2 Description of Car Product10.3 Innovation10.4 Refinement10.5 Collaboration10.6 Learning Outcomes10.7 Future Career Aspirations & Research10.8 Overall Clarity
1 Not applicable to Development Class teams at State Finals
Article C14 | Appendices
Article C14 | Appendices
20
19 L
eve
ls 2
, 3 &
4 C
om
pet
itio
n R
eg
ula
tio
ns
43
C14
.5
Dev
elo
pm
en
t C
lass
Po
rtfo
lio C
on
ten
t P
ag
e P
lan
LEVE
L 2
ROV
(Dev
) Por
tfolio
Pag
e Co
nten
t Pla
n: Su
gges
ted
cont
ent o
rgan
isatio
n fo
r ass
essm
ent
Ente
rpris
e Po
rtfol
io:
Pr
ojec
t Man
agem
ent &
Car
eer D
evel
opm
ent
M
arketin
g&Partnerships
Engi
neer
ing
Portf
olio
:
En
gine
eringDe
signProcess
Team
Mgt
: Rol
es,
Resp
onsib
ilitie
s &
In
tera
ction
***
Tim
e, F
inan
ce, R
isk
Com
ms,
Mgt
To
ols
& M
etho
ds
*
Link
ing
Skill
s w
ith
Futu
re C
aree
rs
*
Stak
ehol
der R
OI
Plan
& C
omm
unity
Ac
tivity
/ PR
**
Team
Nam
e, L
ogo,
Br
andi
ng, U
nifo
rm &
Tr
ade
Boot
h
***
Part
ners
hips
with
Ex
tern
al In
divi
dual
s &
Col
labo
ratio
ns
*
Cove
r:*Re
nder
ing
Nam
e &
Log
o
***
Wat
er C
raft
Desig
nRe
quire
men
ts &
Re
sear
ch
***
Wat
er C
raft
Desig
n Id
eas
***
Wat
er C
raft
Man
ufac
turin
g
***
Wat
er C
raft
Desig
n Ph
ysic
al T
estin
g &
Ev
alua
tion
***
Free
for t
eam
s to
de
cide
con
tent
To st
ream
line
the
judg
ing
proc
ess,
team
s ar
e to
arr
ange
the
cont
ent o
f the
ir En
terp
rise
and
Engi
neer
ing
Portf
olio
s in
acc
orda
nce
with
this
Cont
ent P
lan.
How
ever
the
num
ber o
f pa
ges
allo
cate
d to
the
sugg
este
d cr
iteria
abo
ve is
at t
he d
iscre
tion
of e
ach
team
.*
Com
pone
nts
of th
e Co
ver a
re c
ritica
l to
both
the
Ente
rpris
e &
Eng
inee
ring
Portf
olio
s
Pink
– P
ortfo
lio c
onte
nt a
sses
sed
in P
ortfo
lio c
riter
iaBl
ue –
Por
tfolio
con
tent
ass
esse
d in
Boo
th c
riter
iaRe
d –
Portf
olio
con
tent
ass
esse
d in
Eng
inee
ring
crite
riaG
reen
– A
sses
sed
in M
arke
ting
crite
ria
Wat
er C
raft
Desig
nDe
velo
pmen
t &
Anal
ysis
***
Cove
r:*N
ame
& L
ogo
***
Ap
pen
dic
es
|
Art
icle
C14
Article C14 | Appendices
20
19 L
eve
ls 2
, 3 &
4 C
om
pet
itio
n R
eg
ula
tio
ns
44
C14
.6
Pro
fess
ion
al C
lass
Po
rtfo
lio C
on
ten
t P
ag
e P
lan
LEVE
L 2
ROV
(Pro
) & L
EVEL
4 S
UB:
Por
tfolio
Pag
e Co
nten
t Pla
n: Su
gges
ted
cont
ent o
rgan
isatio
n fo
r ass
essm
ent
Ente
rpris
e Po
rtfol
io:
Pr
ojec
t Man
agem
ent &
Car
eer D
evel
opm
ent
M
arketin
g&Partnerships
Engi
neer
ing
Portf
olio
:
En
gine
eringDe
signProcess
Team
Mgt
: Rol
es,
Resp
onsib
ilitie
s &
In
tera
ction
***
Proj
ect S
cope
&
Tim
e M
anag
emen
t To
ols
/ Met
hods
*
Team
Fin
ance
s, R
isk
Man
agem
ent
Tool
s &
Met
hods
*
Com
mun
icati
on
Tool
s &
Met
hods
*
Link
ing
Skill
s w
ith
Futu
re C
aree
rs
*
Team
Sta
keho
lder
RO
I Pla
n &
Acti
vity
**
Team
Com
mun
ity
Activ
ity/ P
R &
Soc
ial
Med
ia *
Team
Nam
e, L
ogo
&
Bran
ding
***
Uni
form
&Bo
oth
Desig
n
*
Part
ners
hips
with
Ex
tern
al In
divi
dual
s &
Col
labo
ratio
ns
*
Cove
r:*Re
nder
ing
Nam
e &
Log
o
***
Wat
er C
raft
Desig
nRe
quire
men
ts &
Re
sear
ch
***
Wat
er C
raft
Desig
n Id
eas
***
Wat
er C
raft
Desig
nDe
velo
pmen
t
*
Wat
er C
raft
Desig
nDe
velo
pmen
t
***
Wat
er C
raft
Desig
nAn
alys
is
***
Wat
er C
raft
Man
ufac
turin
g
***
Wat
er C
raft
Man
ufac
turin
g
***
Wat
er C
raft
Desig
n Ph
ysic
al T
estin
g
***
Wat
er C
raft
Proc
ess
Eval
uatio
n
***
Free
for t
eam
s to
de
cide
con
tent
To st
ream
line
the
judg
ing
proc
ess,
team
s ar
e to
arr
ange
the
cont
ent o
f the
ir En
terp
rise
and
Engi
neer
ing
Portf
olio
s in
acc
orda
nce
with
this
Cont
ent P
lan.
How
ever
the
num
ber o
f pa
ges
allo
cate
d to
the
sugg
este
d cr
iteria
abo
ve is
at t
he d
iscre
tion
of e
ach
team
.*
Com
pone
nts
of th
e Co
ver a
re c
ritica
l to
both
the
Ente
rpris
e &
Eng
inee
ring
Portf
olio
s
Pink
– P
ortfo
lio c
onte
nt a
sses
sed
in P
ortfo
lio c
riter
iaBl
ue –
Por
tfolio
con
tent
ass
esse
d in
Boo
th c
riter
iaRe
d –
Portf
olio
con
tent
ass
esse
d in
Eng
inee
ring
crite
riaG
reen
– A
sses
sed
in M
arke
ting
crite
ria
Cove
r:*N
ame
& L
ogo
***
Ap
pen
dic
es
|
Art
icle
C14
C14
.7
Po
rtfo
lio P
ag
e C
on
ten
t P
lan
- L
eve
l 3 S
pa
tia
l De
sig
n
Ap
pen
dic
es
|
Art
icle
C14
20
19 L
eve
ls 2
, 3 &
4 C
om
pet
itio
n R
eg
ula
tio
ns
45
LEVE
L 3
Spati
al D
esig
n: P
ortfo
lio P
age
Cont
ent P
lan
Sugg
este
d co
nten
t org
anisa
tion
for a
sses
smen
t
Ente
rpris
e Po
rtfol
io:
ProjectM
anagem
ent&
Skillsfo
rFutureCa
reers
M
arketin
g&Partnerships
Engi
neer
ing
Portf
olio
:
En
gine
eringDe
signProcess
To st
ream
line
the
judg
ing
proc
ess,
team
s ar
e to
arr
ange
the
cont
ent o
f the
ir En
terp
rise
and
Engi
neer
ing
Portf
olio
s in
acc
orda
nce
with
this
Cont
ent P
lan.
How
ever
the
num
ber o
f pa
ges
allo
cate
d to
the
sugg
este
d cr
iteria
abo
ve is
at t
he d
iscre
tion
of e
ach
team
.*
Com
pone
nts
of th
e Co
ver a
re c
ritica
l to
both
the
Ente
rpris
e &
Eng
inee
ring
Portf
olio
s
Pink
– P
ortfo
lio c
onte
nt a
sses
sed
in P
ortfo
lio c
riter
iaBl
ue –
Por
tfolio
con
tent
ass
esse
d in
Boo
th c
riter
iaRe
d –
Portf
olio
con
tent
ass
esse
d in
Eng
inee
ring
crite
riaG
reen
– A
sses
sed
in M
arke
ting
crite
ria
Team
Mgt
: Rol
es,
Resp
onsib
ilitie
s &
In
tera
ction
**
Proj
ect S
cope
&
Tim
e M
anag
emen
t To
ols
/ Met
hods
*
Team
Fin
ance
s, R
isk
Man
agem
ent
Tool
s &
Met
hods
*
Com
mun
icati
on
Tool
s &
Met
hods
*
Link
ing
Skill
s w
ith
Futu
re C
aree
rs
*
Cove
r:*N
ame
& L
ogo
***
Team
Sta
keho
lder
RO
I Pla
n &
Acti
vity
**
Team
Com
mun
ity
Activ
ity/ P
R &
Soc
ial
Med
ia *
Team
Nam
e, L
ogo
&
Bran
ding
***
Uni
form
& B
ooth
De
sign
*
Part
ners
hips
with
Ex
tern
al In
divi
dual
s &
Col
labo
ratio
ns
*
Cove
r:*Re
nder
ing
Nam
e &
Log
o
***
Desig
n Sp
ecs
Requ
irem
ents
***
Desig
n &
Fac
tors
Re
sear
ch
***
Conc
ept T
rade
Offs
an
d Su
stai
nabi
lity
***
Desig
nDe
velo
pmen
tH
uman
Fac
tors
***
Desig
n an
d Co
ncep
t Id
eas
***
Desig
nDe
velo
pmen
tH
uman
Fac
tors
***
Desig
nDe
velo
pmen
tAm
eniti
es/S
ervi
ces
***
Inno
vatio
n/Re
finem
ent
***
Desig
n Ev
alua
tion
***
Free
for t
eam
s to
de
cide
con
tent
20
19 L
eve
ls 2
, 3 &
4 C
om
pet
itio
n R
eg
ula
tio
ns
46
C14
.8
Cri
teri
a 1
- S
pe
cifi
cati
on
s C
om
plia
nce
Sco
re C
ard
(Le
vel 2
: RO
V C
lass
)
JUD
GIN
G S
UB
CA
TE
GO
RY
Sp
ec
ific
at
ion
ST
EA
M ID
PR
IMA
RY
EV
IDE
NC
ER
oV
TE
AM
NA
ME
SE
CO
ND
AR
Y E
VID
EN
CE
en
gin
ee
Rin
g c
om
pl
ian
ce
Bo
ok
le
tS
CH
OO
L
CR
ITE
RIA
1C
OM
PE
TIT
ION
CL
AS
S
Fo
r cl
ari
fica
tio
n o
n in
div
idu
al r
eg
ula
tio
ns,
refe
r to
th
e 2
019
Au
stra
lian
Te
chn
ica
l Re
gu
lati
on
s.
Re
gu
lati
on
Re
gu
lati
on
Ove
rvie
wM
in/M
ax
Qu
ick
Gu
ide
Pe
na
lty
Pa
ss/F
ail
Jud
ge
1Ju
dg
e 2
Re
ma
rks
Re
ctifi
cati
on
AR
TIC
LE
T2
– G
EN
ER
AL
PR
INC
IPL
ES
Pa
ss/F
ail
T2
.4S
afe
Co
nst
ruct
ion
Vis
ua
l Ch
eck
-20
T2
.9.1
De
sig
ne
d a
nd
en
gin
ee
red
usi
ng
CA
D /
CA
MC
he
ck P
ort
folio
-20
T2
.9.2
Pro
pe
ller
cove
rV
isu
al C
he
ck-2
0
T2
.10
No
n-w
ate
r so
lub
le s
urf
ace
fin
ish
/ f
ully
dry
Vis
ua
l Ch
eck
-20
T2
.11.
1R
EA
Co
rpo
rate
Pa
rtn
er
Logo
s: R
EA
, Do
D, S
iS, V
is. C
on
ne
ct.
Vis
ua
l Ch
eck
-2 e
a
T2
.11.
2R
EA
Co
rpo
rate
Pa
rtn
er
logo
s m
inim
um
dim
en
sio
ns
(>2
0%
larg
er)
Min
90
mm
x 5
0m
m-2
ea
T2
.1.3
RE
A C
orp
ora
te P
art
ne
r lo
go p
osi
tio
nin
g in
sid
e v
iew
Vis
ua
l Ch
eck
-2 e
a
T2
.11.
4D
eca
l In
teg
rity
Vis
ua
l Ch
eck
-2 e
a
T2
.12
Po
we
r S
ou
rce
12
vV
isu
al C
he
ckN
/A
T2
.13
Sta
tus
du
rin
g t
ria
ls –
no
ite
ms
rem
ove
d/r
ep
lace
d/
ad
de
dV
isu
al C
he
ck-2
AR
TIC
LE
T5
– B
OD
Y R
EG
UL
AT
ION
SP
ass
/Fa
il
T3
.1B
od
y co
nst
ruct
ion
– r
igid
ext
ern
al c
om
po
ne
nts
V
isu
al C
he
ck-4
T3
.2V
irtu
al C
arg
o20
0m
m x
20
0m
m x
100
mm
-4
T3
.3V
irtu
al C
arg
o id
en
tifi
ed
in e
ng
ine
eri
ng
dra
win
gs
Ch
eck
Dra
win
gs
-2
Poi
nts
Pen
alty
Pag
e To
tal
Tim
e P
enal
ty
Pag
e To
tal
Pos
t Rec
tifica
tion
Tim
e
Pen
alty
Pag
e To
tal
LE
GE
ND
E
ligib
ility
Re
gu
lati
on
s/P
oss
ible
Dis
qu
alifi
cati
on
Cri
tica
l Re
gu
lati
on
s/T
ime
Pe
na
lty
Ap
pen
dic
es
|
Art
icle
C14
20
19 L
eve
ls 2
, 3 &
4 C
om
pet
itio
n R
eg
ula
tio
ns
47
C14
.9
Cri
teri
a 1
- S
pe
cifi
cati
on
s C
om
plia
nce
Sco
re C
ard
(Le
vel 4
: Su
bm
ari
ne
Cla
ss)
(1 o
f 2
)
JUD
GIN
G S
UB
CA
TE
GO
RY
Sp
ec
ific
at
ion
ST
EA
M ID
PR
IMA
RY
EV
IDE
NC
ES
uB
ma
Rin
eT
EA
M N
AM
E
SE
CO
ND
AR
Y E
VID
EN
CE
en
gin
ee
Rin
g c
om
pl
ian
ce
Bo
ok
le
tS
CH
OO
L
CR
ITE
RIA
1C
OM
PE
TIT
ION
CL
AS
S
Fo
r cl
ari
fica
tio
n o
n in
div
idu
al r
eg
ula
tio
ns,
refe
r to
th
e 2
019
Au
stra
lian
Te
chn
ica
l Re
gu
lati
on
s.
Re
gu
lati
on
Re
gu
lati
on
Ove
rvie
wM
in/M
ax
Qu
ick
Gu
ide
Pe
na
lty
Pa
ss/F
ail
Jud
ge
1Ju
dg
e 2
Re
ma
rks
Re
ctifi
cati
on
AR
TIC
LE
T3
– G
EN
ER
AL
PR
INC
IPL
ES
Pa
ss/F
ail
T2
.4S
afe
Co
nst
ruct
ion
Vis
ua
l Ch
eck
-20
T2
.9.1
De
sig
ne
d a
nd
en
gin
ee
red
usi
ng
CA
D /
CA
MC
he
ck P
ort
folio
-20
T2
.9.2
Pro
pe
ller
cove
rV
isu
al C
he
ck-2
0
T2
.10
No
n-w
ate
r so
lub
le s
urf
ace
fin
ish
/ f
ully
dry
Vis
ua
l Ch
eck
N/A
T2
.11.
1R
EA
Co
rpo
rate
Pa
rtn
er
Logo
s: R
EA
, Do
D, S
iS, V
is. C
on
ne
ct.
Vis
ua
l Ch
eck
-2 e
a
T2
.11.
2R
EA
Co
rpo
rate
Pa
rtn
er
logo
s m
inim
um
dim
en
sio
ns
(>2
0%
larg
er)
Min
90
mm
x 5
0m
m-2
ea
T2
.11.
3R
EA
Co
rpo
rate
Pa
rtn
er
logo
po
siti
on
ing
in s
ide
vie
wV
isu
al C
he
ck-2
ea
T2
.11.
4D
eca
l In
teg
rity
Vis
ua
l Ch
eck
-2 e
a
T2
.12
Un
de
fin
ed
fea
ture
sC
he
ck T
2.1
-2 e
a
AR
TIC
LE
T5
– G
EN
ER
AL
RE
GU
LA
TIO
NS
Pa
ss/F
ail
T3
.1O
vera
ll le
ng
th
Ma
x 10
00
mm
-4
T3
.2O
vera
ll w
idth
Ma
x 3
00
mm
-4
T3
.3O
vera
ll h
eig
ht
Ma
x 3
00
mm
-4
T3
.4S
tatu
s d
uri
ng
tri
als
– n
o it
em
s re
mo
ved
/re
pla
ced
/ad
de
dV
isu
al C
he
ck-2
T3
.6B
od
y C
on
stru
ctio
nV
isu
al C
he
ck-4
T3
.7V
irtu
al C
arg
o8
0m
m ø
x 5
00
mm
L-4
T3
.8V
irtu
al C
arg
o id
en
tifi
ed
in e
ng
ine
eri
ng
dra
win
gs
Ch
eck
Dra
win
gs
-2
Poi
nts
Pen
alty
Pag
e To
tal
Tim
e P
enal
ty
Pag
e To
tal
Pos
t Rec
tifica
tion
Tim
e
Pen
alty
Pag
e To
tal
LE
GE
ND
E
ligib
ility
Re
gu
lati
on
s/P
oss
ible
Dis
qu
alifi
cati
on
Cri
tica
l Re
gu
lati
on
s/T
ime
Pe
na
lty
Ap
pen
dic
es
|
Art
icle
C14
20
19 L
eve
ls 2
, 3 &
4 C
om
pet
itio
n R
eg
ula
tio
ns
48
C14
.10
C
rite
ria
1 -
Sp
eci
fica
tio
ns
Co
mp
lian
ce S
core
Ca
rd (
Leve
l 4: S
ub
ma
rin
e C
lass
) (2
of
2)
Re
gu
lati
on
Re
gu
lati
on
Ove
rvie
wM
in/M
ax
Qu
ick
Gu
ide
Pe
na
lty
Pa
ss/F
ail
Jud
ge
1Ju
dg
e 2
Re
ma
rks
Re
ctifi
cati
on
AR
TIC
LE
T4
– F
OR
E A
ND
AF
T C
AP
SP
ass
/Fa
il
T4
.1C
ap
s m
ad
e o
f p
ure
ly r
igid
co
mp
on
en
tsV
isu
al C
he
ck-4
T4
.2C
ap
s m
ust
no
t e
nte
r m
ain
bo
dy
(exc
ep
t co
nn
ect
ion
s)V
isu
al C
he
ck-2
AR
TIC
LE
T5
– C
ON
TR
OL
SU
RFA
CE
SP
ass
/Fa
il
T5
.1C
on
tro
l Su
rfa
ces
ide
nti
fie
d in
dra
win
gs
Ch
eck
Dra
win
gs
-2
T5
.2F
ore
co
ntr
ol s
urf
ace
s fo
rwa
rd o
f b
od
y.V
isu
al C
he
ck-2
T5
.3A
ft c
on
tro
l su
rfa
ces
rea
r o
f b
od
yV
isu
al C
he
ck-2
T5
.4C
on
tro
l su
rfa
ces
rem
ain
rig
idV
isu
al C
he
ck-2
AR
TIC
LE
T6
– F
IN/S
AIL
Pa
ss/F
ail
T6
.1F
in/s
ail
po
siti
on
ing
(w
ith
in b
ou
nd
ari
es
of
bo
dy)
V
isu
al C
he
ck-2
T6
.2F
in/s
ail
min
imu
m le
ng
thM
in 1
00
mm
-4
T6
.3F
in/s
ail
min
imu
m h
eig
ht
Min
50
mm
-4
T6
.4F
in/s
ail
min
imu
m w
idth
Min
30
mm
-2
Poi
nts
Pen
alty
Pag
e To
tal
Tim
e P
enal
ty
Pag
e To
tal
Pos
t Rec
tifica
tion
Tim
e
Pen
alty
Pag
e To
tal
Poi
nts
Pen
alty
Gra
nd T
otal
Tim
e P
enal
ty
Gra
nd T
otal
Pos
t Rec
tifica
tion
Tim
e
Pen
alty
Gra
nd T
otal
LE
GE
ND
E
ligib
ility
Re
gu
lati
on
s/P
oss
ible
Dis
qu
alifi
cati
on
Cri
tica
l Re
gu
lati
on
s/T
ime
Pe
na
lty
Ap
pen
dic
es
|
Art
icle
C14
20
19 L
eve
ls 2
, 3 &
4 C
om
pet
itio
n R
eg
ula
tio
ns
49
C14
.11
Cri
teri
a 2
- C
om
pu
ter
Aid
ed
De
sig
n S
core
Ca
rd (
Leve
l 3: S
pa
tia
l De
sig
n C
lass
)
JUD
GIN
G S
UB
CA
TE
GO
RY
co
mp
ut
eR
aid
ed
de
Sig
nT
EA
M ID
PR
IMA
RY
EV
IDE
NC
EV
R W
al
k t
hR
ou
gh
de
mo
nS
tR
at
ion
TE
AM
NA
ME
SE
CO
ND
AR
Y E
VID
EN
CE
en
gin
ee
Rin
g c
om
pl
ian
ce
Bo
ok
le
tS
CH
OO
L
CR
ITE
RIA
2C
OM
PE
TIT
ION
CL
AS
S
Low
Dev
elo
pin
gA
dva
nce
dS
core
Cri
teri
a0
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 1
0/1
0
2.1
Des
ign
inte
ntSt
uden
ts w
ere
able
to e
xpla
in a
t a
basic
leve
l thei
r des
ign
inte
nt a
nd th
e el
emen
ts w
hich
mad
e up
thei
r des
ign
Stud
ents
sho
wed
an
unde
rsta
ndin
g of
th
e de
sign
ele
men
ts a
nd h
ow th
ey fi
tted
toge
ther
with
in th
eir d
esig
n off
erin
g
Sign
ifica
nt re
sear
ch s
uppo
rted
the
desi
gn in
tent
, the
role
of
the
diffe
rent
ele
men
ts w
ithin
the
desi
gn a
nd h
ow th
ese
elem
ents
wor
ked
toge
ther
/1
0
2.2
Mod
el d
etai
lM
odel
is b
asic
in d
esig
n an
d de
velo
pmen
tM
odel
sho
ws
sign
ifica
nt d
etai
l in
the
elem
ents
whi
ch m
ake
up th
e m
odel
Gre
at a
ttent
ion
to d
etai
l has
bee
n m
ade
incl
udin
g th
e us
e of
mat
eria
ls a
nd fi
nish
es to
mak
e th
e m
odel
app
ear
real
istic
/10
2.3
Expl
anat
ion
of m
odel
la
yout
The
stud
ents
wer
e ab
le to
hig
hlig
ht
the
basi
cs o
f the
ir m
odel
and
ex
plai
n ho
w e
ach
of th
e el
emen
ts
fitte
d w
ithin
the
over
all d
esig
n of
th
eir m
odel
.
Stud
ents
wer
e ab
le to
eas
ily m
ove
abou
t th
eir m
odel
disp
layin
g an
und
erst
andi
ng
of th
e la
yout
and
the
way
eac
h of
th
e el
emen
ts fi
tted
toge
ther
to c
reat
e a
cohe
sive
envir
onm
ent f
or h
uman
ha
bita
tion
Stud
ents
sho
wed
a h
igh
leve
l of u
nder
stan
ding
of t
heir
mod
el a
nd th
e ro
le o
f hum
an e
rgon
omic
s pl
ayed
in
the
deve
lopm
ent o
f the
ir de
sign
. Too
ls s
uch
as h
uman
m
anne
quin
s w
ere
used
with
in th
eir m
odel
to h
elp
expl
ain
the
envi
ronm
ent
/10
2.4
Und
erst
andi
ng o
f hu
man
erg
onom
ics
Basi
c un
ders
tand
ing
of th
e im
pact
of h
uman
erg
onom
ics
and
habi
tatio
n ha
d w
ithin
thei
r en
viro
nmen
t was
vis
ible
Stud
ents
sho
wed
a h
igh
leve
l of
unde
rsta
ndin
g of
the
impo
rtanc
e of
hu
man
erg
onom
ics a
nd s
how
ed a
le
vel o
f res
earc
h in
to c
reat
ing
hum
an
envir
onm
ents
A hi
gh le
vel o
f und
erst
andi
ng o
f hum
an e
rgon
omic
s an
d ha
bita
tion
was
sho
w w
ith e
xam
ples
of h
ow th
e vi
rtual
3D
m
odel
hel
ped
the
desi
gn p
roce
ss a
nd p
ropa
gate
d de
sign
ch
ange
s
/10
2.5
Use
of h
uman
m
anne
quin
s to
hi
ghlig
ht d
esig
n in
tent
.
Littl
e us
e of
hum
an m
anne
quin
s or
sim
ilar t
ools
to h
ighl
ight
the
thin
king
behi
nd th
e la
yout
of t
heir
envir
onm
ent
Dev
elop
ing
unde
rsta
ndin
g of
how
the
use
of h
uman
man
nequ
ins
can
be u
sed
to d
evel
op th
eir d
esig
n co
ncep
ts a
nd
desi
gns
Hig
h le
vel o
f und
erst
andi
ng o
f the
use
of h
uman
m
anne
quin
s to
dis
play
how
the
envi
ronm
ent w
ould
op
erat
e an
d ho
w a
ll el
emen
ts o
f the
mod
el m
et th
e de
sign
inte
nt
/10
2.6
Engi
neer
ing
Dra
win
g/s
Littl
e or
no
deta
il. L
ittle
or n
o an
nota
tion.
Third
ang
le o
rthog
raph
ic p
roje
ctio
n.
Exce
ssiv
e or
insu
ffici
ent d
etai
l.
Third
ang
le o
rthog
raph
ic pr
ojec
tion
and
unre
nder
ed
isom
etric
vie
w o
r sim
ilar.
Parts
list /
bill
of m
ater
ials.
Ad
ditio
nal v
iew
s to
sho
w s
uffice
nt d
etai
l. R
egul
atio
n co
mpl
ianc
e sh
own.
/10
2.7
Ren
derin
gPo
or q
ualit
yD
iffer
ent v
iew
s. S
ome
inco
nsis
tenc
ies
with
fina
l car
.
Diff
eren
t vie
ws.
Per
ect m
atch
to fi
nal c
ar in
clud
ing
bran
ding
. En
viro
nmen
t and
ligh
ting.
Hig
h en
d ph
otor
ealis
tic re
nder
ing
tech
niqu
e./1
0
GR
AN
D T
OTA
L/7
0
Ap
pen
dic
es
|
Art
icle
C14
20
19 L
eve
ls 2
, 3 &
4 C
om
pet
itio
n R
eg
ula
tio
ns
50
C14
.12
C
rite
ria
2 -
Co
mp
ute
r A
ide
d D
esi
gn
Sco
re C
ard
(Le
vel 2
: RO
V &
Lev
el 4
: Su
bm
ari
ne
Cla
ss)
JUD
GIN
G S
UB
CA
TE
GO
RY
co
mp
ut
eR
aid
ed
de
Sig
nT
EA
M ID
PR
IMA
RY
EV
IDE
NC
Et
ea
m in
te
RV
ieW
TE
AM
NA
ME
SE
CO
ND
AR
Y E
VID
EN
CE
• m
od
el
lin
g o
n t
ea
m c
om
pu
te
R
• e
ng
ine
eR
ing
co
mp
lia
nc
e B
oo
kl
et
SC
HO
OL
CR
ITE
RIA
2C
OM
PE
TIT
ION
CL
AS
S
Low
Dev
elo
pin
gA
dva
nce
dS
core
Cri
teri
a0
10
1 2
2 3
3 4
5 6
4 5
7 8
9 1
0/5 /1
0
2.1
App
licat
ion
of C
AD
Basi
c un
ders
tand
ing
and
appl
icat
ion
of C
ADG
ood
unde
rsta
ndin
g an
d ap
plic
atio
n of
CAD
Adva
nced
und
erst
andi
ng a
nd a
pplic
atio
n of
CAD
th
roug
hout
. /1
0
2.2
CA
D O
rgan
isat
ion
Gen
eral
ly d
isor
gani
sed
Satis
fact
ory
orga
nisa
tion
of d
ata
and
mod
els
Dat
a &
parts
hig
hly
orde
red
& lin
ked.
Ful
l CAD
pro
duct
as
sem
bly
/10
2.3
CA
D B
ased
Ana
lysi
sM
inim
al a
naly
sis
show
nG
ood
anal
ysis
. Res
ults
app
lied
to
deve
lopm
ent
Varie
ty o
f adv
ance
d an
d re
leva
nt a
naly
sis
tech
niqu
es
cond
ucte
d/1
0
2.4
Ove
rall
CA
D T
echn
ical
M
erit
Basi
c C
AD d
esig
n w
ith li
ttle
tech
nica
l mer
it D
evel
oped
CAD
des
ign
with
som
e te
chni
cal m
erit
Orig
inal
& c
leve
r dev
elop
ed C
AD d
esig
n w
ith e
xcel
lent
te
chni
cal m
erit
/5
2.5
CA
D M
odel
vs
Fini
shed
Pr
oduc
tBa
sic
Sim
ilarit
yG
ood
Sim
ilarit
yEx
celle
nt S
imila
rity
/10
2.6
Engi
neer
ing
Dra
win
g/s
Littl
e or
no
deta
il. L
ittle
or n
o an
nota
tion.
Third
ang
le o
rthog
raph
ic p
roje
ctio
n.
Exce
ssiv
e or
insu
ffici
ent d
etai
l.
Third
ang
le o
rthog
raph
ic p
roje
ctio
n an
d un
rend
ered
is
omet
ric v
iew
or s
imila
r. Pa
rts li
st /
bill
of m
ater
ials
. Ad
ditio
nal v
iew
s to
sho
w s
uffice
nt d
etai
l. R
egul
atio
n co
mpl
ianc
e sh
own.
/10
2.7
Ren
derin
gPo
or q
ualit
yD
iffer
ent v
iew
s. S
ome
inco
nsis
tenc
ies
with
fina
l car
.
Diff
eren
t vie
ws.
Per
ect m
atch
to fi
nal c
ar in
clud
ing
bran
ding
. En
viro
nmen
t and
ligh
ting.
Hig
h en
d ph
otor
ealis
tic re
nder
ing
tech
niqu
e./1
0
GR
AN
D T
OTA
L/6
5
Ap
pen
dic
es
|
Art
icle
C14
20
19 L
eve
ls 2
, 3 &
4 C
om
pet
itio
n R
eg
ula
tio
ns
51
C14
.13
C
rite
ria
3 -
En
gin
ee
rin
g: M
an
ufa
ctu
rin
g S
core
Ca
rd (
Leve
l 2: R
OV
& L
eve
l 4: S
ub
ma
rin
e C
lass
)
JUD
GIN
G S
UB
CA
TE
GO
RY
ma
nu
fac
tu
Rin
gT
EA
M ID
PR
IMA
RY
EV
IDE
NC
Et
ea
m in
te
RV
ieW
TE
AM
NA
ME
SE
CO
ND
AR
Y E
VID
EN
CE
te
am
en
gin
ee
Rin
g p
oR
tf
ol
ioS
CH
OO
L
CR
ITE
RIA
3C
OM
PE
TIT
ION
CL
AS
S
Low
Dev
elo
pin
gA
dva
nce
dS
core
Cri
teri
a0
10
1 2
2 3
3 4
5 6
4 5
7 8
9 1
0/5 /1
0
3.1
App
licat
ion
of C
AM
/ C
NC
Min
imal
evi
denc
e of
CN
C
unde
rsta
ndin
gEff
ectiv
e us
e an
d un
ders
tand
ing
of
CN
C m
achi
ning
pro
cess
es u
sed
Hig
h le
vel o
f CN
C m
achi
ning
com
pete
nce.
App
ropr
iate
ly
com
plex
tech
niqu
es a
nd p
roce
sses
use
d to
ach
ieve
m
anuf
actu
ring
goal
/10
3.2
Man
ufac
turin
g pr
oces
s ca
ps a
nd s
ail
Littl
e m
anuf
actu
ring
deta
ilsM
anuf
actu
ring
proc
esse
s an
d so
me
issu
es p
rese
nted
Det
aile
d as
sess
men
t of a
ll m
anuf
actu
ring,
sta
ges,
m
ater
ials
& is
sues
/10
3.3
Man
ufac
turin
g pr
oces
s in
tern
al c
ompo
nent
sLi
ttle
man
ufac
turin
g de
tails
Man
ufac
turin
g pr
oces
ses
and
som
e is
sues
pre
sent
edD
etai
led
asse
ssm
ent o
f all
man
ufac
turin
g, s
tage
s,
mat
eria
ls &
issu
es/1
0
3.4
Tole
ranc
ing
/ Qua
lity
Con
trol
Littl
e co
nsid
erat
ion
of to
lera
ncin
g an
d qu
ality
con
trol
Goo
d co
nsid
erat
ion
of to
lera
ncin
g an
d qu
ality
con
trol
Exce
llent
con
side
ratio
n of
tole
ranc
ing
and
qual
ity c
ontro
l/1
0
3.5
Ove
rall
Man
ufac
turin
g Te
chni
cal M
erit
Basi
c m
anuf
actu
ring
with
littl
e te
chni
cal m
erit
Goo
d m
anuf
actu
ring
with
tech
nica
l m
erit
Orig
inal
& c
leve
r man
ufac
turin
g pr
oces
ses
with
exc
elle
nt
tech
nica
l mer
it/5
3.6
Qua
lity
of F
inis
hed
Prod
uct -
Geo
met
ry/
Form
Rea
sona
ble
form
with
som
e in
cons
iste
ncie
sG
ood
over
all f
orm
and
ass
embl
y w
ith a
ttent
ion
to d
etai
lEx
cept
iona
l atte
ntio
n to
det
ail a
cros
s al
l asp
ects
of f
orm
/10
3.7
Qua
lity
of F
inis
hed
Prod
uct -
Sur
face
fini
shR
easo
nabl
e fin
ish
with
som
e in
cons
iste
ncie
sG
ood
over
all fi
nish
qua
lity
with
at
tent
ion
to d
etai
lSh
owca
se fi
nish
qua
lity.
Exc
eptio
nal a
ttent
ion
to d
etai
l/1
0
GR
AN
D T
OTA
L/6
5
Ap
pen
dic
es
|
Art
icle
C14
20
19 L
eve
ls 2
, 3 &
4 C
om
pet
itio
n R
eg
ula
tio
ns
52
C14
.14
C
rite
ria
4 -
En
gin
ee
rin
g: D
esi
gn
Pro
cess
Sco
re C
ard
(Le
vel 3
: Sp
ati
al D
esi
gn
Cla
ss)
JUD
GIN
G S
UB
CA
TE
GO
RY
en
gin
ee
Rin
g d
eS
ign
pR
oc
eS
ST
EA
M ID
PR
IMA
RY
EV
IDE
NC
Et
ea
m e
ng
ine
eR
ing
po
Rt
fo
lio
TE
AM
NA
ME
SE
CO
ND
AR
Y E
VID
EN
CE
SC
HO
OL
CR
ITE
RIA
4C
OM
PE
TIT
ION
CL
AS
S
Low
Dev
elo
pin
gA
dva
nce
dS
core
Cri
teri
a0
1 2
0 1
2 3
4 5
3 4
5 6
6 7
8 9
10
11
127
8 9
10
13 1
4 1
5 1
6 1
7 18
19
20
/10
/20
4.1
Des
ign
Spec
ifica
tion
Lim
ited
deve
lopm
ent o
f a
spec
ifica
tion
desc
ribin
g th
e sp
atia
l en
viro
nmen
t
A w
ell-d
evel
oped
des
crip
tion
of th
e sp
atia
l en
viro
nmen
t, su
ffici
ent t
o de
scrib
e th
e el
emen
ts c
onta
ined
in th
e sp
atia
l des
ign
prop
osal
An e
xcel
lent
and
det
aile
d de
scrip
tion
of th
e sp
atia
l env
ironm
ent a
nd d
esig
n off
erin
g in
clud
ing
its k
ey a
dvan
tage
s ov
er a
ltern
ativ
es/1
0
4.2
Idea
sSi
ngle
or b
asic
con
cept
sM
ultip
le c
once
pts
with
link
s to
rese
arch
.Se
vera
l tec
hnic
ally
insp
ired
idea
s fo
r diff
eren
t fe
atur
es/fu
nctio
ns/1
0
4.3
Dev
elop
men
tLi
mite
d de
velo
pmen
t sho
wn
Logi
cal d
esig
n de
velo
pmen
ts e
xpla
ined
Cle
arly
just
ified
dev
elop
men
ts b
ased
aro
und
rese
arch
on
issu
es o
f hum
an fa
ctor
s/2
0
4.4
Ana
lysi
sLi
ttle
evid
ence
of a
naly
sis
Anal
ysis
whi
ch is
rele
vant
and
resu
lts
docu
men
ted
Qua
lity
anal
ysis
met
hodo
logi
es. A
ccur
ate
resu
lts a
nd d
ata
linke
d to
des
ign
revi
sion
s.
Adva
nced
use
of d
esig
n to
ols
/10
4.5
Eval
uatio
nN
o or
lim
ited
eval
uatio
nEv
alua
tions
at d
iffer
ent s
tage
s ha
ve li
mite
d co
nsid
erat
ion
of h
uman
fact
ors
Exce
llent
ong
oing
eva
luat
ions
link
ed w
ith
cons
ider
atio
n of
hum
an fa
ctor
s/2
0
4.6
Ove
rall
Des
ign
Tech
nica
l M
erit
Basi
c de
sign
pro
cess
with
littl
e te
chni
cal m
erit
Dev
elop
ed d
esig
n pr
oces
s w
ith s
ome
tech
nica
l m
erit
Orig
inal
& c
leve
r dev
elop
ed d
esig
n pr
oces
s w
ith e
xcel
lent
tech
nica
l mer
it/1
0
GR
AN
D T
OTA
L/8
0
Ap
pen
dic
es
|
Art
icle
C14
20
19 L
eve
ls 2
, 3 &
4 C
om
pet
itio
n R
eg
ula
tio
ns
53
C14
.15
C
rite
ria
4 -
En
gin
ee
rin
g: D
esi
gn
Pro
cess
Sco
re C
ard
(Le
vel 2
: RO
V &
Lev
el 4
: Su
bm
ari
ne
Cla
ss)
JUD
GIN
G S
UB
CA
TE
GO
RY
en
gin
ee
Rin
g d
eS
ign
pR
oc
eS
ST
EA
M ID
PR
IMA
RY
EV
IDE
NC
Et
ea
m e
ng
ine
eR
ing
po
Rt
fo
lio
TE
AM
NA
ME
SE
CO
ND
AR
Y E
VID
EN
CE
SC
HO
OL
CR
ITE
RIA
4C
OM
PE
TIT
ION
CL
AS
S
Low
Dev
elo
pin
gA
dva
nce
dS
core
Cri
teri
a0
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 1
0/1
0
4.1
Req
uire
men
ts A
naly
sis
Lim
ite
d d
eve
lop
me
nt
of
ob
ject
ive
sG
oo
d d
eve
lop
me
nt
of
ob
ject
ive
sE
xce
llen
t st
ate
me
nt
of
ob
ject
ive
s su
pp
ort
ed
by
rese
arc
h/1
0
4.2
Idea
sS
ing
le o
r b
asi
c co
nce
pts
Mu
ltip
le c
on
cep
ts w
ith
lin
ks t
o re
sea
rch
.S
eve
ral t
ech
nic
ally
insp
ired
idea
s fo
r d
iffe
ren
t fe
atu
res/
fun
ctio
ns
/10
4.3
Dev
elop
men
tL
imit
ed
dev
elo
pm
en
t sh
ow
nLo
gic
al d
esi
gn
dev
elo
pm
en
ts e
xpla
ine
dC
lea
rly
just
ifie
d d
eve
lop
me
nts
ba
sed
aro
un
d
rese
arc
h o
n is
sue
s o
f h
um
an
ha
bit
ati
on
/10
4.4
Ana
lysi
sL
ittl
e e
vid
en
ce o
f a
na
lysi
sA
na
lysi
s w
hic
h is
rele
van
t a
nd
resu
lts
do
cum
en
ted
Qu
alit
y a
na
lysi
s m
eth
od
olo
gie
s. A
ccu
rate
resu
lts
an
d d
ata
lin
ked
to
de
sig
n re
visi
on
s. A
dva
nce
d
use
of
CF
D a
nd
oth
er
de
sig
n t
oo
ls/1
0
4.5
Phys
ical
Tes
ting
Lit
tle
evi
de
nce
of
test
ing
Test
s w
hic
h a
re re
leva
nt
wit
h re
sult
s d
ocu
me
nte
dQ
ua
lity
exp
eri
me
nta
l met
ho
do
log
ies.
Acc
ura
te
resu
lts
linke
d t
o d
esi
gn
revi
sio
ns
/10
4.6
Eval
uatio
nN
o o
r lim
ite
d e
valu
ati
on
Eva
lua
tio
ns
at
diff
ere
nt
sta
ges
Exc
elle
nt
on
goin
g e
valu
ati
on
s lin
ked
wit
h
con
sid
era
tio
n o
f h
um
an
erg
on
om
ics
/10
4.7
Ove
rall
Des
ign
Tech
nica
l M
erit
Ba
sic
de
sig
n p
roce
ss w
ith
litt
le
tech
nic
al m
eri
t D
eve
lop
ed
de
sig
n p
roce
ss w
ith
so
me
te
chn
ica
l m
eri
t O
rig
ina
l & c
leve
r d
eve
lop
ed
de
sig
n p
roce
ss w
ith
ex
celle
nt
tech
nic
al m
eri
t/1
0
GR
AN
D T
OTA
L/7
0
Ap
pen
dic
es
|
Art
icle
C14
20
19 L
eve
ls 2
, 3 &
4 C
om
pet
itio
n R
eg
ula
tio
ns
54
C14
.16
C
rite
ria
5 -
Po
rtfo
lio: P
roje
ct M
an
ag
em
en
t S
core
Ca
rd (
All
Cla
sse
s)
JUD
GIN
G S
UB
CA
TE
GO
RY
pR
oje
ct
ma
na
ge
me
nt
& l
ink
ing
Sk
illS
to
fu
tu
Re
ca
Re
eR
ST
EA
M ID
PR
IMA
RY
EV
IDE
NC
Et
ea
m e
nt
eR
pR
iSe
po
Rt
fo
lio
TE
AM
NA
ME
SE
CO
ND
AR
Y E
VID
EN
CE
SC
HO
OL
CR
ITE
RIA
5C
OM
PE
TIT
ION
CL
AS
S
Low
Dev
elo
pin
gA
dva
nce
dS
core
Cri
teri
a0
1 2
0 1
2 3
4 5
3 4
5 6
6 7
8 9
10
11
127
8 9
10
13 1
4 1
5 1
6 1
7 18
19
20
/10
/20
5.1
Team
Rol
es &
Tas
ksL
imit
ed
un
de
rsta
nd
ing
of
role
s a
nd
resp
on
sib
iliti
es
Tea
m ro
les
an
d re
spo
nsi
bili
tie
s id
en
tifi
ed
Hig
hly
str
uct
ure
d t
eam
wit
h c
lea
r ro
les
an
d re
spo
nsi
bili
tie
s.
All
tea
m m
em
be
rs p
rovi
de
cri
tica
l co
ntr
ibu
tio
ns
wit
h
evid
en
ce o
f su
pp
ort
ive
/ove
rla
pp
ing
inte
ract
ion
s. R
ele
van
t sk
ill d
eve
lop
me
nt/
me
nto
rin
g u
nd
ert
ake
n. P
lan
Ch
an
ges
dis
cuss
ed
/10
5.2
Scop
e &
Tim
e M
anag
emen
t L
imit
ed
un
de
rsta
nd
ing
of
sco
pe
o
r ev
ide
nce
of
tim
e m
an
age
me
nt
So
me
pla
nn
ing
use
d t
o g
uid
e p
rog
ress
of
pro
ject
go
als
an
d s
tay
on
ta
sk
Exc
elle
nt
con
tro
l of
all
pro
ject
de
live
rab
les
un
de
rsta
nd
ing
re
qu
irem
en
ts a
nd
set
tin
g g
oa
ls t
o m
ain
tain
fo
cus
an
d
evid
en
ce o
f u
sin
g e
ffe
ctiv
e m
an
age
me
nt
met
ho
ds
an
d
too
ls t
o s
tay
on
ta
sk a
nd
me
et d
ead
line
s. P
lan
Ch
an
ges
dis
cuss
ed
/10
5.3
Res
ourc
e &
Ris
k M
anag
emen
tL
imit
ed
bu
dge
tin
g o
r ri
sk
aw
are
ne
ssS
om
e re
sou
rce
s id
en
tifi
ed
, bu
dge
tin
g
an
d c
on
tin
gen
cy p
lan
s
Exc
elle
nt
reso
urc
e m
an
age
me
nt,
un
de
rsta
nd
ing
of
bu
dge
t co
ntr
ol a
nd
evi
de
nce
of
fin
an
cia
l acc
ou
nti
ng
met
ho
ds.
R
easo
na
ble
co
nti
nge
ncy
pla
n a
nd
ris
k a
sse
ssm
en
t p
rep
are
d a
nd
/or
un
de
rta
ken
/10
5.4
Inte
rnal
Com
mun
icat
ion
Lim
ite
d t
eam
co
mm
un
ica
tio
nB
asi
c te
am
co
mm
un
ica
tio
n p
roce
sse
s d
iscu
sse
dE
xce
llen
t u
se o
f m
ult
iple
co
mm
un
ica
tio
n t
oo
ls a
nd
m
eth
od
s fo
r eff
ect
ive
tea
m p
lan
nin
g a
nd
acc
ou
nta
bili
ty/1
0
5.5
Stak
ehol
der
Enga
gem
ent
Lim
ite
d s
take
ho
lde
r e
nga
gem
en
tB
asi
c u
nd
ers
tan
din
g a
nd
ap
plic
ati
on
of
sta
keh
old
er
en
gage
me
nt
Exc
elle
nt
un
de
rsta
nd
ing
an
d a
pp
lica
tio
n o
f in
itia
tin
g a
nd
m
ain
tain
ing
sta
keh
old
er
en
gage
me
nt
wit
h c
olla
bo
rato
rs,
spo
nso
rs, m
en
tors
an
d s
up
po
rte
rs u
sin
g m
ult
iple
to
ols
an
d
met
ho
ds
/10
5.6
Skill
Dev
elop
men
t for
Fu
ture
Car
eers
No
or
littl
e e
ffo
rt t
o id
en
tify
ski
lls
an
d li
nk
the
m t
o D
efe
nce
Ind
ust
ry
care
ers
A g
oo
d e
ffo
rt b
y th
e t
eam
to
ide
nti
fy
ind
ivid
ua
l ski
lls d
eve
lop
ed
bu
t m
ore
w
ork
ne
ed
ed
to
lin
k th
ese
wit
h D
efe
nce
In
du
stry
ca
ree
rs
De
mo
nst
rab
le e
vid
en
ce in
po
rtfo
lio b
y te
am
to
ide
nti
fy
an
d re
cord
sev
era
l in
du
stry
sp
eci
fic
an
d e
mp
loya
bili
ty
skill
s d
eve
lop
ed
th
rou
gh
th
eir
pa
rtic
ipa
tio
n in
Su
bs
in
Sch
oo
ls a
nd
ho
w t
he
se c
an
lin
k to
ca
ree
rs w
ith
in D
efe
nce
In
du
stri
es
/20
5.7
Eval
uatio
nL
imit
ed
eva
lua
tio
nS
om
e e
valu
ati
on
ap
plie
dE
valu
ati
on
pro
cess
es
ap
plie
d t
hro
ug
ho
ut
the
ma
na
gem
en
t o
f ke
y d
eliv
era
ble
s/1
0
GR
AN
D T
OTA
L/8
0
Ap
pen
dic
es
|
Art
icle
C14
20
19 L
eve
ls 2
, 3 &
4 C
om
pet
itio
n R
eg
ula
tio
ns
55
C14
.17
Cri
teri
a 6
- P
ort
folio
: Po
rtfo
lio D
esi
gn
Sco
re C
ard
(A
ll C
lass
es)
JUD
GIN
G S
UB
CA
TE
GO
RY
cl
aR
ity
& Q
ua
lit
yT
EA
M ID
PR
IMA
RY
EV
IDE
NC
Et
ea
m e
ng
ine
eR
ing
& e
nt
eR
pR
iSe
po
Rt
fo
lio
TE
AM
NA
ME
SE
CO
ND
AR
Y E
VID
EN
CE
SC
HO
OL
CR
ITE
RIA
6C
OM
PE
TIT
ION
CL
AS
S
Low
Dev
elo
pin
gA
dva
nce
dS
core
Cri
teri
a0
1
2 3
4 5
/5
6.1
Prod
uctio
n Q
ualit
y of
M
ater
ials
Po
or
qu
alit
yB
asi
c p
rin
tin
g a
nd
bin
din
gQ
ua
lity
pri
nte
d d
ocu
me
nt
on
qu
alit
y p
ap
er
in a
pp
rop
ria
tely
d
ura
ble
bin
din
g/5
6.2
Prod
uctio
n Q
ualit
y of
C
onte
ntM
issi
ng
do
cum
en
tati
on
Ba
sic
do
cum
en
tati
on
pro
vid
ed
Co
rre
ct n
um
be
r o
f p
age
s. A
ll re
qu
ired
do
cum
en
tati
on
in
clu
de
d a
nd
pro
fess
ion
ally
pre
sen
ted
. Su
b re
nd
eri
ng
an
d
tea
m lo
go o
n c
ove
r p
age
in k
ee
pin
g w
ith
bra
nd
ing
/5
6.3
Con
tent
Org
anis
atio
nD
iso
rga
nis
ed
co
nte
nt
So
me
co
nte
nt
org
an
isa
tio
nH
igh
ly o
rga
nis
ed
an
d m
an
age
d p
ort
folio
co
nte
nt
wit
h lo
gic
al
stru
ctu
re a
nd
flo
w o
f in
form
ati
on
/5
6.4
Layo
ut D
esig
nD
istr
act
ing
imp
erf
ect
ion
s w
eake
n t
he
wo
rkS
om
e la
you
t d
esi
gn
fo
rma
t a
tte
mp
ted
We
ll fo
rma
tte
d la
you
t d
esi
gn
co
nsi
ste
ntl
y a
pp
lyin
g m
arg
ins,
a
lign
me
nt,
sp
aci
ng
, gra
ph
ics
an
d d
esi
gn
ele
me
nts
wit
h
con
sid
era
tio
n o
f vi
sua
l ba
lan
ce a
nd
flo
w. A
ll p
age
s o
pti
ma
lly
use
d a
nd
un
clu
tte
red
. Cre
ati
ve s
tyle
rea
lise
d
/5
6.5
Typo
grap
hyF
on
t ch
oic
es
are
dis
tra
ctin
g o
r w
eake
n t
he
wo
rkS
om
e c
on
sid
era
tio
n f
or
typ
e t
rea
tme
nt
Co
nsi
ste
nt
use
of
typ
og
rap
hy
wit
h a
pp
rop
ria
te c
ho
ice
s a
nd
lim
ite
d n
um
be
r o
f te
xt a
nd
hea
dlin
e f
on
t si
zes,
sty
les,
co
lou
rs
an
d h
iera
rch
y. In
ke
ep
ing
wit
h b
ran
din
g. E
asy
to
rea
d/5
6.6
Phot
os &
Imag
esP
oo
r q
ua
lity
or
use
of
ima
ges.
N
o c
ap
tio
nin
gB
asi
c q
ua
lity
an
d u
se o
f im
age
s. S
om
e
rea
son
ab
ly c
on
cise
ca
pti
on
ing
Just
ifie
d u
se o
f ex
celle
nt,
un
-pix
ella
ted
, cle
ar,
un
dis
tort
ed
p
ho
tos
an
d im
age
s th
at
are
co
nci
sely
an
d a
ccu
rate
ly
cap
tio
ne
d. P
rop
erl
y si
zed
, co
lou
red
an
d in
teg
rate
d w
ith
tex
t to
ill
ust
rate
key
me
ssa
ges.
Co
nsi
de
rs b
ran
din
g
/5
6.7
Cre
ativ
e G
raph
ics
(Vis
ual e
ffect
s an
d in
fogr
aphi
cs)
Po
or
gra
ph
ics
an
d/o
r ex
ecu
tio
n.
No
ca
pti
on
ing
Gra
ph
ics
att
em
pte
d w
ith
so
me
su
cce
ss.
So
me
rea
son
ab
ly c
on
cise
ca
pti
on
ing
Just
ifie
d, w
ell
exe
cute
d a
nd
pla
ced
, un
-pix
ella
ted
, un
dis
tort
ed
g
rap
hic
s th
at
are
co
nci
sely
an
d a
ccu
rate
ly c
ap
tio
ne
d.
Co
nsi
ste
nt
use
of
colo
ur/
to
ne
s/ s
ha
pe
s, w
ith
ou
t vi
sua
l o
verl
oa
d, i
n k
ee
pin
g w
ith
bra
nd
ing
/5
6.8
Editi
ng/P
roof
read
ing
Err
or
rid
de
n. P
oo
r a
tte
mp
t a
t p
roo
frea
din
gG
oo
d a
tte
mp
t w
ith
ad
dit
ion
al e
dit
ing
re
qu
ired
fo
r cl
ari
tyN
o e
rro
rs d
ete
cte
d in
tex
t a
nd
gra
ph
ics
/5
6.9
Ref
eren
cing
/Pla
giar
ism
Ob
vio
us
failu
res
in re
fere
nci
ng
So
me
att
em
pt
at
refe
ren
cin
g. S
om
e
err
ors
evi
de
nt
No
det
ect
ed
pla
gia
rism
wit
h e
xce
llen
t u
se o
f re
fere
nci
ng
fo
r a
uth
or’
s w
ritt
en
wo
rd, g
rap
hic
s/p
ho
tos
an
d v
ide
o s
ou
rce
s et
c/5
6.10
W
ritin
g &
Rea
dabi
lity
Diffi
cult
to
un
de
rsta
nd
. Un
ab
le
to re
ad
Do
es
no
t su
sta
in re
ad
ing
or
inte
rest
. D
oe
s n
ot
‘flo
w’
Co
nci
se, a
pp
rop
ria
te, g
ram
ma
tica
lly c
orr
ect
tex
t, c
ap
tio
ns,
a
nd
hea
dlin
es.
Invi
tin
g a
nd
en
gag
ing
. Su
sta
ins
the
rea
de
r’s
inte
rest
/5
GR
AN
D T
OTA
L/5
0
Ap
pen
dic
es
|
Art
icle
C14
20
19 L
eve
ls 2
, 3 &
4 C
om
pet
itio
n R
eg
ula
tio
ns
56
C14
.18
C
rite
ria
7 -
Ma
rket
ing
: Bra
nd
ing
Sco
re C
ard
(A
ll C
lass
es)
JUD
GIN
G S
UB
CA
TE
GO
RY
BR
an
din
gT
EA
M ID
PR
IMA
RY
EV
IDE
NC
Et
ea
m in
te
RV
ieW
at
tR
ad
e d
iSp
la
yT
EA
M N
AM
E
SE
CO
ND
AR
Y E
VID
EN
CE
te
am
en
te
Rp
RiS
e p
oR
tf
ol
ioS
CH
OO
L
CR
ITE
RIA
7C
OM
PE
TIT
ION
CL
AS
S
Low
Dev
elo
pin
gA
dva
nce
dS
core
Cri
teri
a0
10
1 2
2 3
3 4
5 6
4 5
7 8
9 1
0/5 /1
0
7.1
Team
Nam
e1 Irr
eleva
nt ch
oice
Limite
d co
nside
ratio
n of
mea
ning
Well
cons
idere
d, m
eanin
gful te
am na
me a
ppro
priat
e to g
oals
and i
mag
e pro
jectio
n/5
7.2
Logo
Dev
elop
men
t¹Lim
ited
ideas
&
deve
lopm
ent.
No o
rigina
l wo
rk e
viden
t
Som
e log
o ide
a pr
ogre
ssion
& cr
eativ
e log
o m
odific
ation
of t
ype
or g
raph
ics
note
d
A nu
mbe
r of lo
go id
eas c
onsid
ered
with
atte
ntion
to te
am g
oals
and
ident
ity.
Crea
tive
& or
igina
l logo
dev
elopm
ent c
learly
relat
es to
the
team
’s ch
osen
nam
e,
ident
ity a
nd p
urpo
se/5
7.3
Fina
l Log
o D
esig
n¹Te
am lo
go is
abs
ent o
r co
nfus
ingLo
go m
essa
ge is
sim
ple a
nd o
bviou
sSt
rong
team
logo
that
gra
bs a
ttent
ion, g
ener
ates
a p
ositiv
e re
spon
se, a
nd is
ea
sily r
ecog
nised
and
reca
lled.
Well
cons
idere
d us
e of
colou
rs, t
ype
and
shap
es
enha
nce
mea
ning.
In ke
eping
with
bra
nding
/5
7.4
Logo
App
licat
ion
Poor
qua
lity re
prod
uctio
n,
limite
d te
am lo
go b
adgin
g
Mos
t item
s are
bad
ged
with
team
logo
. Te
am lo
go q
uality
dim
inish
ed w
hen
enlar
ged
or re
duce
d ac
ross
app
licat
ions.
Team
logo
scale
s well
to la
rge
and
small
bad
ging
appli
catio
ns. A
ll app
licat
ions a
re
of h
igh q
uality
and
app
ropr
iately
pos
itione
d fo
r stro
ng im
pact
/5
7.5
Team
Bra
ndin
gBr
andin
g m
essa
ge is
wea
k wi
th in
cons
isten
t app
licat
ion
acro
ss th
e pr
oject
Effec
tive
team
bra
nding
cons
isten
tly
appli
ed a
cros
s pro
ject c
ompo
nent
s
Exce
llent
and
high
ly eff
ectiv
e m
essa
ging
of te
am im
age.
Qua
lity a
nd co
nsist
ent
bran
ding
of te
am n
ame,
logo
, typ
ogra
phy,
& co
lours
app
lied
acro
ss a
ll pro
ject
elem
ents:
por
tfolio
, unif
orm
s, ca
r, dis
play,
socia
l med
ia an
d co
llate
ral. I
con,
ta
gline
or m
asco
t add
ed to
stre
ngth
en b
rand
ing
/10
7.6
Med
ia E
xpos
ure
Limite
d or
ineff
ectiv
eSo
me
deve
lopm
ent,
som
e im
pact,
som
e co
nside
ratio
n of
aud
ience
and
plat
form
s
Clea
r, de
velop
ed, h
igh im
pact
med
ia str
ateg
y, inc
luding
socia
l med
ia. C
aref
ul co
nside
ratio
n of
targ
et a
udien
ce a
nd su
itable
plat
form
s. Ev
idenc
e of
atte
mpt
to
work
with
med
ia br
oadc
aste
rs/p
ublis
hers
with
som
e do
cum
ente
d su
cces
s/5
7.7
Team
Spo
nsor
s &
REA
C
orpo
rate
Par
tner
s R
OI
Little
or n
o RO
ISp
onso
rship
ack
nowl
edge
d. S
ome
logos
inc
luded
in p
rojec
t coll
ater
al
Clea
r and
app
ropr
iate
visibi
lity o
f tea
m sp
onso
rs a
nd R
EA C
orpo
rate
Par
tner
s. Qu
ality
repr
oduc
tion
of a
ppro
priat
e sp
onso
r and
REA
Cor
pora
te P
artn
er lo
gos
acro
ss a
ll pro
ject c
ollat
eral
as re
quire
d/1
0
7.8
Team
Uni
form
Ineff
ectiv
e or
inco
nsist
ent,
sam
e or
sim
ilar t
o su
ppor
ters
Basic
and
cons
isten
t acr
oss t
he te
am,
distin
ct fro
m su
ppor
ters
Crea
tive a
nd co
nside
red u
se of
bran
ding a
nd ap
prop
riate
stylin
g for
all m
embe
rs. Te
am
mem
ber n
ames
and r
oles c
learly
iden
tified
. Clea
rly di
stinc
t from
supp
orter
s/5
7.9
Team
Pre
senc
eNo
t all p
rese
nt /
Poor
ene
rgy
Gene
rally
ent
husia
stic
All te
am m
embe
rs a
re a
ppro
priat
ely e
ngag
ing a
nd e
nthu
siasti
c abo
ut th
eir w
ork
/5
7.10
Te
am K
now
ledg
eLim
ited
enga
gem
ent
Som
e m
embe
rs kn
owled
geab
leEa
ch m
embe
r is h
ighly
know
ledge
able
in th
eir ro
le an
d als
o br
oadly
kn
owled
geab
le ab
out d
etail
s of t
heir
entry
. Able
to d
efer
to o
ther
s with
confi
denc
e an
d sh
are
proje
ct ow
ners
hip/5
GR
AN
D T
OTA
L/6
01
Jud
ged
fro
m a
tea
m’s
En
terp
rise
Po
rtfo
lio
Ap
pen
dic
es
|
Art
icle
C14
20
19 L
eve
ls 2
, 3 &
4 C
om
pet
itio
n R
eg
ula
tio
ns
57
C14
.19
C
rite
ria
8 -
Ma
rket
ing
: Tra
de
Dis
pla
y S
core
Ca
rd (
Leve
l 3: S
pa
tia
l De
sig
n C
lass
)
JUD
GIN
G S
UB
CA
TE
GO
RY
tR
ad
e d
iSp
la
yT
EA
M ID
PR
IMA
RY
EV
IDE
NC
Et
Ra
de
diS
pl
ay
TE
AM
NA
ME
SE
CO
ND
AR
Y E
VID
EN
CE
SC
HO
OL
CR
ITE
RIA
8C
OM
PE
TIT
ION
CL
AS
S
Low
Dev
elo
pin
gA
dva
nce
dS
core
Cri
teri
a0
10
1 2
0 1
2 3
2 3
3 4
5 6
4 5
6 7
8 9
4 5
7 8
9 1
0 1
0 1
1 12
13 1
4 1
5
/5 /10
/15
8.1
Prod
uct D
ispl
ayLi
ttle
cons
ider
atio
n gi
ven
to
pres
enta
tion
of th
e de
sign
sp
ace
Som
e at
tem
pt to
dis
play
the
desi
gn
spac
e as
a k
ey fe
atur
e
Exce
llent
des
ign
mat
eria
ls a
nd m
etho
ds u
sed
to e
ffect
ivel
y di
spla
y th
e de
sign
spa
ce a
nd it
s ke
y co
mpo
nent
s to
mak
e it
a fe
atur
e of
th
e di
spla
y/5
8.2
Info
rmat
ion
Des
ign
Lim
ited
or re
peat
of f
olio
Proj
ect m
essa
ge is
exp
ande
d be
yond
fo
lio
Cle
an, w
ell-o
rgan
ised
layo
ut o
f writ
ten
and
grap
hica
l inf
orm
atio
n w
ith s
harp
pro
fess
iona
l app
eal.
Con
clus
ive
snap
shot
of t
eam
’s
key
mes
sage
s. U
nclu
ttere
d, e
ngag
ing,
and
eas
y to
read
. C
onsi
sten
t bra
ndin
g st
yle
/10
8.3
Use
of I
CTs
Lim
ited
ICTs
ICTs
use
d to
enh
ance
pre
sent
atio
nEx
celle
nt in
tegr
atio
n of
mul
timed
ia te
chno
logi
es a
nd in
tera
ctiv
e IC
Ts to
dem
onst
rate
, eng
age
and
info
rm/1
0
8.4
Visu
al D
esig
n &
Impa
ct
Lim
ited
or lo
w im
pact
cr
eativ
ity, b
rand
ing,
m
essa
ging
and
reco
gniti
on
of s
pons
ors.
Som
e re
leva
nt c
reat
ive
mes
sagi
ng
evid
ent w
ith c
onsi
dera
tion
for a
rang
e of
fact
ors
Cre
ativ
e de
sign
whi
ch is
attr
activ
e an
d im
pact
ful.
Exce
llent
re
pres
enta
tion
of th
e te
am n
ame,
bra
nd a
nd b
rand
col
ours
. Te
am m
essa
ge a
nd/o
r slo
gan
is c
lear
ly e
vide
nt a
nd s
pons
ors
are
appr
opria
tely
reco
gnis
ed. I
nnov
ativ
e el
emen
ts a
dd in
tere
st a
nd
supp
ort t
eam
mes
sagi
ng.
/10
8.5
Stru
ctur
al D
esig
n
No
or li
mite
d de
sign
de
velo
pmen
t evi
dent
, no
r con
side
ratio
n fo
r co
nstra
inin
g fa
ctor
s.
Som
e go
od e
vide
nce
of d
esig
n de
velo
pmen
t and
con
side
ratio
n fo
r co
nstra
inin
g fa
ctor
s.
Cre
ativ
e an
d ju
stifi
ed s
truct
ural
des
ign
with
exc
elle
nt u
se o
f spa
ce
for p
rimar
y di
spla
y co
mpo
nent
s. E
vide
nce
of d
esig
n de
velo
pmen
t co
nsid
erin
g fu
nctio
nalit
y at
eve
nts,
bra
ndin
g an
d te
am m
essa
ging
, m
ater
ials
, bud
get,
sust
aina
bilit
y, tr
ansp
ort a
nd a
ssem
bly
cons
train
ts.
/15
8.6
Mat
eria
ls S
elec
tion
&
Use
No
or li
mite
d re
sear
ch in
to
mat
eria
ls w
ith c
onst
rain
ing
fact
ors
in m
ind.
Som
e pr
oble
ms
are
evid
ent.
Gen
eral
ly e
ffect
ive
and
rele
vant
cho
ice
of m
ater
ials
con
side
ring
som
e fa
ctor
s
Hig
hly
effec
tive
choi
ce o
f mat
eria
ls. E
vide
nce
of d
evel
opm
ent
cons
ider
ing
fact
ors
incl
udin
g ap
pear
ance
, bud
get,
sust
aina
bilit
y, tra
nspo
rt an
d as
sem
bly
cons
train
ts. T
eam
und
erst
ands
pro
perti
es
of m
ater
ials
use
d an
d is
abl
e to
just
ify th
eir c
hoic
es, a
chie
ving
an
exce
llent
fini
sh w
ith e
vide
nt a
ttent
ion
to d
etai
l.
/15
GR
AN
D T
OTA
L/6
5
Ap
pen
dic
es
|
Art
icle
C14
20
19 L
eve
ls 2
, 3 &
4 C
om
pet
itio
n R
eg
ula
tio
ns
58
C14
.20
Cri
teri
a 8
- M
ark
etin
g: T
rad
e D
isp
lay
Sco
re C
ard
(Le
vel 2
: RO
V &
Lev
el 4
: Su
bm
ari
ne
Cla
ss)
JUD
GIN
G S
UB
CA
TE
GO
RY
tR
ad
e d
iSp
la
yT
EA
M ID
PR
IMA
RY
EV
IDE
NC
Et
Ra
de
diS
pl
ay
TE
AM
NA
ME
SE
CO
ND
AR
Y E
VID
EN
CE
SC
HO
OL
CR
ITE
RIA
8C
OM
PE
TIT
ION
CL
AS
S
Low
Dev
elo
pin
gA
dva
nce
dS
core
Cri
teri
a0
10
1 2
0 1
2 3
2 3
3 4
5 6
4 5
6 7
8 9
4 5
7 8
9 1
010
11
12 1
3 1
4 1
5
/5 /10
/15
8.1
Wat
er C
raft
Dis
play
Littl
e co
nsid
erat
ion
give
n to
pr
esen
tatio
n of
the
wat
er
craf
t
Som
e at
tem
pt to
dis
play
the
wat
er c
raft
as a
key
feat
ure
Exce
llent
des
ign
mat
eria
ls a
nd m
etho
ds u
sed
to e
ffect
ivel
y di
spla
y th
e w
ater
cra
ft an
d its
key
com
pone
nts
to m
ake
it a
feat
ure
of th
e di
spla
y/5
8.2
Info
rmat
ion
Des
ign
Lim
ited
or re
peat
of f
olio
Proj
ect m
essa
ge is
exp
ande
d be
yond
fo
lio
Cle
an, w
ell-o
rgan
ised
layo
ut o
f writ
ten
and
grap
hica
l inf
orm
atio
n w
ith s
harp
pro
fess
iona
l app
eal.
Con
clus
ive
snap
shot
of t
eam
’s
key
mes
sage
s. U
nclu
ttere
d, e
ngag
ing,
and
eas
y to
read
. C
onsi
sten
t bra
ndin
g st
yle
/10
8.3
Use
of I
CTs
Lim
ited
ICTs
ICTs
use
d to
enh
ance
pre
sent
atio
nEx
celle
nt in
tegr
atio
n of
mul
timed
ia te
chno
logi
es a
nd in
tera
ctiv
e IC
Ts to
dem
onst
rate
, eng
age
and
info
rm/1
0
8.4
Visu
al D
esig
n &
Impa
ct
Lim
ited
or lo
w im
pact
cr
eativ
ity, b
rand
ing,
m
essa
ging
and
reco
gniti
on
of s
pons
ors.
Som
e re
leva
nt c
reat
ive
mes
sagi
ng
evid
ent w
ith c
onsi
dera
tion
for a
rang
e of
fact
ors
Cre
ativ
e de
sign
whi
ch is
attr
activ
e an
d im
pact
ful.
Exce
llent
re
pres
enta
tion
of th
e te
am n
ame,
bra
nd a
nd b
rand
col
ours
. Te
am m
essa
ge a
nd/o
r slo
gan
is c
lear
ly e
vide
nt a
nd s
pons
ors
are
appr
opria
tely
reco
gnis
ed. I
nnov
ativ
e el
emen
ts a
dd in
tere
st
and
supp
ort t
eam
mes
sagi
ng.
/10
8.5
Stru
ctur
al D
esig
n1
No
or li
mite
d de
sign
de
velo
pmen
t evi
dent
, no
r con
side
ratio
n fo
r co
nstra
inin
g fa
ctor
s.
Som
e go
od e
vide
nce
of d
esig
n de
velo
pmen
t and
con
side
ratio
n fo
r co
nstra
inin
g fa
ctor
s.
Cre
ativ
e an
d ju
stifi
ed s
truct
ural
des
ign
with
exc
elle
nt u
se o
f sp
ace
for p
rimar
y di
spla
y co
mpo
nent
s. E
vide
nce
of d
esig
n de
velo
pmen
t con
side
ring
func
tiona
lity
at e
vent
s, b
rand
ing
and
team
mes
sagi
ng, m
ater
ials
, bud
get,
sust
aina
bilit
y, tr
ansp
ort a
nd
asse
mbl
y co
nstra
ints
.
/15
8.6
Mat
eria
ls S
elec
tion
&
Use
No
or li
mite
d re
sear
ch in
to
mat
eria
ls w
ith c
onst
rain
ing
fact
ors
in m
ind.
Som
e pr
oble
ms
are
evid
ent.
Gen
eral
ly e
ffect
ive
and
rele
vant
cho
ice
of
mat
eria
ls c
onsi
derin
g so
me
fact
ors
Hig
hly
effec
tive
choi
ce o
f mat
eria
ls. E
vide
nce
of d
evel
opm
ent
cons
ider
ing
fact
ors
incl
udin
g ap
pear
ance
, bud
get,
sust
aina
bilit
y, tra
nspo
rt an
d as
sem
bly
cons
train
ts. T
eam
und
erst
ands
pro
perti
es
of m
ater
ials
use
d an
d is
abl
e to
just
ify th
eir c
hoic
es, a
chie
ving
an
exce
llent
fini
sh w
ith e
vide
nt a
ttent
ion
to d
etai
l.
/15
GR
AN
D T
OTA
L - D
evel
opm
ent C
lass
/50
GR
AN
D T
OTA
L - P
rofe
ssio
nal C
lass
/65
1 N
ot
ap
plic
ab
le t
o L
eve
l 2 D
eve
lop
me
nt
Cla
ss t
eam
s a
t S
tate
Fin
als
Ap
pen
dic
es
|
Art
icle
C14
20
19 L
eve
ls 2
, 3 &
4 C
om
pet
itio
n R
eg
ula
tio
ns
59
C14
.21
Cri
teri
a 9
- P
rese
nta
tio
n: T
ech
niq
ue
Sco
re C
ard
(A
ll C
lass
es)
JUD
GIN
G S
UB
CA
TE
GO
RY
te
ch
niQ
ue
TE
AM
ID
PR
IMA
RY
EV
IDE
NC
Et
ea
m p
Re
Se
nt
at
ion
TE
AM
NA
ME
SE
CO
ND
AR
Y E
VID
EN
CE
SC
HO
OL
CR
ITE
RIA
9C
OM
PE
TIT
ION
CL
AS
S
Low
Dev
elo
pin
gA
dva
nce
dS
core
Cri
teri
a0
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 1
0/1
0
9.1
Pres
enta
tion
ener
gyAr
tifici
al a
nd/o
r low
ene
rgy
Spea
kers
gen
eral
ly e
nthu
sias
tic w
ith
livel
y de
liver
yPa
ssio
nate
with
effe
ctiv
e an
d ap
prop
riate
leve
ls o
f liv
elin
ess
/10
9.2
Team
Con
trib
utio
nM
inim
al te
am p
artic
ipat
ion
Goo
d co
ntrib
utio
ns fr
om m
ost t
eam
m
embe
rsEx
celle
nt te
am w
ork
with
all
mem
bers
par
ticip
atin
g eff
ectiv
ely
/10
9.3
Visu
al A
ids
Littl
e us
e of
aid
sSo
me
aids
use
d eff
ectiv
ely
Wel
l pro
duce
d, h
ighl
y re
leva
nt a
nd in
tegr
ated
aid
s eff
ectiv
ely
impr
ove
com
mun
icat
ion
/10
9.4
Aud
ienc
e En
gage
men
tM
inim
al e
ngag
emen
tSo
me
audi
ence
con
nect
ion
at ti
mes
Audi
ence
fully
eng
aged
and
exc
ited
thro
ugho
ut p
rese
ntat
ion
/10
9.5
Art
icul
atio
nD
ifficu
lt to
und
erst
and
and/
or
hear
mos
t pre
sent
ers
Inco
nsis
tent
spe
akin
g ab
ility
Exce
llent
arti
cula
tion,
use
of l
angu
age
and
voic
e pr
ojec
tion
by a
ll m
embe
rs th
roug
hout
the
asse
ssm
ent
/10
9.6
Stru
ctur
eN
o st
ruct
ure
pres
ente
d,
diffi
cult
to fo
llow
A ba
sic
stru
ctur
e / o
utlin
e pr
ovid
ed a
nd
coul
d be
follo
wed
by
audi
ence
Cle
ar p
rese
ntat
ion
outli
ne /
over
view
. Exc
elle
nt c
onne
ctio
ns
betw
een
topi
cs a
nd e
asy
for a
udie
nce
to fo
llow
/10
9.7
Use
of T
ime
Too
fast
or r
an o
ut o
f tim
eG
ood
timin
g. B
alan
ced
topi
c de
pth
and
pace
Ran
on
time
or ju
st u
nder
. Exc
elle
nt b
alan
ce o
f dep
th fo
r ea
ch to
pic
/10
GR
AN
D T
OTA
L/7
0
Ap
pen
dic
es
|
Art
icle
C14
20
19 L
eve
ls 2
, 3 &
4 C
om
pet
itio
n R
eg
ula
tio
ns
60
C14
.22
Cri
teri
a 1
0 -
Pre
sen
tati
on
: Co
nte
nt
Sco
re C
ard
(A
ll C
lass
es)
JUD
GIN
G S
UB
CA
TE
GO
RY
co
nt
en
tT
EA
M ID
PR
IMA
RY
EV
IDE
NC
Et
ea
m p
Re
Se
nt
at
ion
TE
AM
NA
ME
SE
CO
ND
AR
Y E
VID
EN
CE
SC
HO
OL
CR
ITE
RIA
10C
OM
PE
TIT
ION
CL
AS
S
Low
Dev
elo
pin
gA
dva
nce
dS
core
Cri
teri
a0
10
1 2
30
1 2
3 4
5
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
6 7
8 9
10
11
12
4 5
10
11
12 1
3 1
4 1
513
14
15
16
17
18 1
9 2
0
/5 /15
/20
10.1
Te
am o
bjec
tives
Lim
ite
d s
tate
me
nt
of
ob
ject
ive
sG
oo
d s
tate
me
nt
of
ob
ject
ive
sE
xce
llen
t st
ate
me
nt
of
ob
ject
ive
s su
pp
ort
ed
by
sou
nd
re
aso
nin
g/5
10.2
D
escr
iptio
n of
Wat
er
Cra
ft / D
esig
n Sp
ace1
Ba
sic
de
scri
pti
on
of
wa
ter
cra
ft
/ d
esi
gn
sp
ace
on
lyG
oo
d d
esc
rip
tio
n o
f w
ate
r cr
aft
/ d
esi
gn
sp
ace
co
mp
on
en
ts a
nd
fea
ture
sE
xce
llen
t d
esc
rip
tio
n o
f w
ate
r cr
aft
/ d
esi
gn
sp
ace
co
mp
on
en
ts a
nd
fea
ture
s in
clu
din
g d
esi
gn
de
cisi
on
s/5
10.3
In
nova
tion
Lit
tle
inn
ova
tio
n p
rese
nte
dIn
no
vati
on
s d
esc
rib
ed
an
d ju
stifi
ed
Ori
gin
alit
y. C
leve
r in
no
vati
on
s w
ith
hig
h p
osi
tive
pro
ject
im
pa
ct/1
5
10.4
R
efine
men
tL
ittl
e re
fin
em
en
t p
rese
nte
dR
efin
em
en
t d
esc
rib
ed
an
d ju
stifi
ed
Cle
ver
refi
ne
me
nt
wit
h h
igh
po
siti
ve p
roje
ct im
pa
ct/1
5
10.5
C
olla
bora
tion
Lit
tle
co
llab
ora
tio
n d
iscu
sse
dL
inks
wit
h in
du
stry
or
hig
he
r e
du
cati
on
d
esc
rib
ed
Co
llab
ora
tio
ns
just
ifie
d w
ith
lin
ks t
o le
arn
ing
an
d p
roje
ct
ou
tco
me
s/2
0
10.6
Le
arni
ng o
utco
mes
No
rea
l re
fle
ctio
ns
dis
cuss
ed
Go
od
exp
lan
ati
on
of
som
e le
arn
ing
o
utc
om
es
A ra
nge
of
pe
rso
na
l, lif
e-l
on
g le
arn
ing
an
d c
are
er
skill
s a
cqu
ired
an
d id
en
tifi
ed
as
pro
ject
ou
tco
me
s fo
r a
ran
ge o
f te
am
me
mb
ers
/15
10.7
Fu
ture
Car
eer
Asp
iratio
ns &
R
esea
rch
Lit
tle
or
no
th
ou
gh
t h
ad
b
ee
n g
ive
n t
o f
utu
re c
are
er
asp
irati
on
s.
Evi
de
nce
of
som
e t
eam
me
mb
ers
re
sea
rch
ing
ca
ree
rs g
en
era
lly b
ut
no
lin
kage
to
op
po
rtu
nit
ies
in D
efe
nce
In
du
stri
es
It is
evi
de
nt
tha
t te
am
me
mb
ers
ha
d t
ho
ug
htf
ully
co
nsi
de
red
th
eir
fu
ture
ca
ree
r a
spira
tio
ns
an
d u
nd
ert
ake
n re
sea
rch
into
h
ow
th
ese
mig
ht
be
lin
ked
wit
h o
pp
ort
un
itie
s b
ein
g o
ffe
red
in
Def
en
ce In
du
stri
es
/15
10.8
O
vera
ll cl
arity
Sev
era
l co
nce
pts
lack
ed
cl
ari
fica
tio
nC
lea
r a
nd
ap
pro
pri
ate
co
nce
pt
exp
lan
ati
on
sE
very
thin
g p
rese
nte
d w
as
un
de
rsto
od
th
rou
gh
exc
elle
nt
exp
lan
ati
on
s/5
GR
AN
D T
OTA
L/9
5
1 D
esi
gn
Sp
ace
rele
van
t to
Lev
el 3
Sp
ati
al D
esi
gn
on
ly
Ap
pen
dic
es
|
Art
icle
C14
20
19 L
eve
ls 2
, 3 &
4 C
om
pet
itio
n R
eg
ula
tio
ns
61
C14
.23
Cri
teri
a 1
1 -
Tri
als
: Ro
v T
ria
l Sco
re C
ard
(Le
vel 2
: RO
V C
lass
)
JUD
GIN
G S
UB
CA
TE
GO
RY
le
Ve
l 2
: Ro
V c
la
SS
TE
AM
ID
PR
IMA
RY
EV
IDE
NC
Et
Ria
lST
EA
M N
AM
E
SE
CO
ND
AR
Y E
VID
EN
CE
SC
HO
OL
CR
ITE
RIA
11C
OM
PE
TIT
ION
CL
AS
S
Flo
tati
on
an
d W
ate
r C
olu
mn
Po
siti
on
ing
Tri
al (
4m
in M
ax)
CR
ITE
RIA
(T
ICK
BO
XE
S)
Po
ints
Flo
at
on
su
rfa
ce a
nd
ho
ld p
osi
tio
n/5
Sit
on
bo
tto
m a
nd
ho
ld p
osi
tio
n/5
Ho
ver
at
mid
de
pth
an
d h
old
po
siti
on
/5
Ret
urn
to
su
rfa
ce a
nd
ho
ld p
osi
tio
n/5
Flo
tati
on
& W
ate
r C
olu
mn
Po
siti
on
ing
Tri
al S
ub
-To
tal
/20
Su
bm
erg
ed
Ma
no
eu
vrin
g T
ria
l (4
min
Ma
x)C
RIT
ER
IA (
TIC
K B
OX
ES
)P
oin
ts
Mo
ve a
hea
d/5
Mo
ve a
ste
rn/5
Turn
to
po
rt/5
Turn
to
sta
rbo
ard
/5
Su
bm
erg
ed
Ma
no
eu
rvri
ng
Tri
al S
ub
-To
tal
/20
Ret
riev
al V
oya
ge
Tri
al (
8m
in M
ax)
CR
ITE
RIA
(T
ICK
BO
XE
S)
Po
ints
Vis
ua
l co
nfi
rma
tio
n
/50
Ob
ject
sO
bje
ct 1
Ob
ject
2O
bje
ct 3
/30
Bu
tto
n a
ctiv
ati
on
/20
Tri
al T
ime
:R
etri
eva
l Vo
yag
e R
an
kin
g P
oin
ts/6
0
Ret
riev
al V
oya
ge
Su
b T
ota
l/1
60
Me
mb
er
Pilo
t P
en
alt
ies
-
GR
AN
D T
OT
AL
/20
0
Ap
pen
dic
es
|
Art
icle
C14
20
19 L
eve
ls 2
, 3 &
4 C
om
pet
itio
n R
eg
ula
tio
ns
62
C14
.24
Cri
teri
a 1
1 -
Tri
als
: Su
bs
Tri
al S
core
Ca
rd (
Leve
l 4: S
ub
ma
rin
e C
lass
)
JUD
GIN
G S
UB
CA
TE
GO
RY
le
Ve
l 4
: Su
BS
cl
aS
ST
EA
M ID
PR
IMA
RY
EV
IDE
NC
Et
Ria
lST
EA
M N
AM
E
SE
CO
ND
AR
Y E
VID
EN
CE
SC
HO
OL
CR
ITE
RIA
11C
OM
PE
TIT
ION
CL
AS
S
Su
rfa
ce M
an
oe
uvr
ing
Tri
al (
4m
in M
ax)
CR
ITE
RIA
(T
ICK
BO
XE
S)
Po
ints
Mo
ve a
hea
d/5
Mo
ve a
ste
rn/5
Turn
to
po
rt/5
Turn
to
sta
rbo
ard
/5
Su
rfa
ce M
an
oe
uvr
ing
Tri
al S
ub
-To
tal
/20
Flo
tati
on
an
d B
all
ast
ing
Tri
al (
4m
in M
ax)
CR
ITE
RIA
(T
ICK
BO
XE
S)
Po
ints
Flo
at
at
leve
l tri
m a
nd
min
ima
l he
el i
nd
efin
ite
ly/5
Ba
llast
to
mid
de
pth
an
d h
old
po
siti
on
ind
efin
ite
ly/5
Sit
on
bo
tto
m in
defi
nit
ely
/5
Ret
urn
to
su
rfa
ce w
ith
leve
l tri
m a
nd
min
ima
l he
el
/5
Flo
tati
on
an
d B
all
ast
ing
Tri
al S
ub
-To
tal
/20
Su
bm
erg
ed
Ma
no
uvr
ing
Tri
al (
4m
in M
ax)
CR
ITE
RIA
(T
ICK
BO
XE
S)
Po
ints
Po
rpo
ise
(w
ith
co
nst
an
t sl
ow
ah
ead
sp
ee
d d
ive,
leve
l ou
t a
t m
id d
ep
th,
resu
rfa
ce)
- a
im t
o d
em
on
stra
te h
ydro
pla
ne
s./1
0
At
mid
de
pth
, mo
ve A
ste
rn/1
0
At
mid
de
pth
, tu
rn t
o p
ort
/10
At
mid
de
pth
, tu
rn t
o s
tarb
oa
rd/1
0
Su
bm
erg
ed
Ma
no
eu
vrin
g T
ria
l Su
b-T
ota
l/4
0
Ap
pen
dic
es
|
Art
icle
C14
20
19 L
eve
ls 2
, 3 &
4 C
om
pet
itio
n R
eg
ula
tio
ns
63
JUD
GIN
G S
UB
CA
TE
GO
RY
le
Ve
l 4
: Su
BS
cl
aS
ST
EA
M ID
PR
IMA
RY
EV
IDE
NC
Et
Ria
lST
EA
M N
AM
E
SE
CO
ND
AR
Y E
VID
EN
CE
SC
HO
OL
CR
ITE
RIA
11C
OM
PE
TIT
ION
CL
AS
S
Tim
ed
Wa
y P
oin
t V
oya
ge
Tri
al (
6m
in M
ax)
CR
ITE
RIA
(T
ICK
BO
XE
S)
Po
ints
Ga
te 1
Wa
ter
cra
ft e
nti
rely
su
bm
erg
ed
, pa
sse
s th
rou
gh
ga
te u
pri
gh
ts, d
oe
s n
ot
ma
ke c
on
tact
/10
Ga
te 2
Wa
ter
cra
ft e
nti
rely
su
bm
erg
ed
, pa
sse
s th
rou
gh
ga
te u
pri
gh
ts, d
oe
s n
ot
ma
ke c
on
tact
/10
Ga
te 3
Wa
ter
cra
ft e
nti
rely
su
bm
erg
ed
, pa
sse
s th
rou
gh
ga
te u
pri
gh
ts, d
oe
s n
ot
ma
ke c
on
tact
/10
Ga
te 4
Wa
ter
cra
ft e
nti
rely
su
bm
erg
ed
, pa
sse
s th
rou
gh
ga
te u
pri
gh
ts, d
oe
s n
ot
ma
ke c
on
tact
/10
Ga
te 5
Wa
ter
cra
ft e
nti
rely
su
bm
erg
ed
, pa
sse
s th
rou
gh
ga
te u
pri
gh
ts, d
oe
s n
ot
ma
ke c
on
tact
/10
Ga
te 6
Wa
ter
cra
ft e
nti
rely
su
bm
erg
ed
, pa
sse
s th
rou
gh
ga
te u
pri
gh
ts, d
oe
s n
ot
ma
ke c
on
tact
/10
Do
ckin
g -
De
pa
rtu
re a
nd
Arr
iva
lW
ate
r cr
aft
is f
ully
co
nta
ine
d a
nd
is s
tati
on
ary
wit
hin
do
ck/1
0
Tri
al T
ime
:T
ime
d W
ay
Po
int
Vo
yag
e R
an
kin
g P
oin
ts/5
0
Tim
ed
Wa
y P
oin
t V
oya
ge
Su
b T
ota
l/1
20
Me
mb
er
Pilo
t P
en
alt
ies
-
GR
AN
D T
OT
AL
/20
0
Ap
pen
dic
es
|
Art
icle
C14
2018 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations 64
1300 204 478 www.rea.org.au