INDIVIDUAL ASSIGNMENT

TECHNOLOGY PARK MALAYSIA

EE038-3.5-2-ESA
ENGINEERING SOFTWARE AND APPLICATIONS
UC2F1601 EEE/EEIT/ME/TE
HAND OUT DATE: 7th SEPTEMBER 2016
HAND IN DATE:

5th OCTOBER 2016

WEIGHTAGE:

30%

INSTRUCTIONS TO CANDIDATES:
1

Submit your assignment at the administrative counter

Students are advised to underpin their answers with the use of

references (cited using the Harvard Name System of Referencing)

3 Late submission will be awarded zero (0) unless Extenuating

Circumstances (EC) are upheld
4

Cases of plagiarism will be penalized

The assignment should be bound in an appropriate style (comb bound or stapled).

Where the assignment should be submitted in both hardcopy and softcopy, the
softcopy of the written assignment and source code (where appropriate) should be
on a CD in an envelope / CD cover and attached to the hardcopy.

You must obtain 50% overall to pass this module.

Version 1.3 UCTI ExCv 2009-12-02

EE038-3.5-2-ESA

Individual Assignment

Page 1 of 7

Engineering Software & Applications

(EE038-3.5-2)
Individual Assignment
Instructions:
1. This assignment is to be carried out individually only.
2. You will need to produce a detail report and the MATLAB coding for this
assignment.
3. Plagiarism is strongly prohibited and will be penalized.
4. A fifteen (15) minutes presentation is required to complete this assignment.
Learning Outcomes:
On completion of this assignment you should be able to demonstrate the following learning
outcomes:
LO
LO1
LO2

Item
Design solution for common engineering problems
Develop solutions with application of engineering software

PO
PO2, PO3
PO3, PO6

where
PO2: Ability to identify engineering problems and apply engineering principles to solve
them.
PO3: Ability to recognize and apply suitable tools and techniques for engineering practical
applications.
PO6: Ability to communicate effectively and professionally.

Question Vs Taxonomy
Assignment
Task No.

Cognitive Level
1 2 3

Psychomotor Level

5 6 1 2 3 4

Affective Level

6 7 1 2 3

80 M

10 M

10 M

POM

80%

10%

10%

Level 2

APU

2016

EE038-3.5-2-ESA

Individual Assignment

Page 2 of 7

Task Description
Mr Kim has a set of resistors with the value of 1, 2, 3, and 4. He wants to have a
filter simulator which is able to simulate and plot the high-pass and low-pass filter by inserting
the value of cutoff frequency. After that, the simulator is able to suggest what is the capacitance
value to be used correspond to the selected resistor value. The formula of the filters and the
cutoff frequency are shown below:
Low Pass
1
() =
1 +

High Pass

() =
1 +

Cutoff frequency
1
=
2

Develop a graphical-user-interface (GUI) with appropriate design that is able to perform the
following:
1. User is able to select the type of filter to be simulated by clicking the corresponding
button of low-pass or high-pass filter.
2. After selecting the type of filter, users are then to select the value of the resistance by
using a drop down menu and insert the value of cutoff frequency using keyboard.
3. The GUI is then able to display the value of the capacitor should be used.
4. The GUI is then able to plot the graph of this filter.
5. You may enhance the appearance of the GUI by inserting pictures and changing the
properties of the UI-objects contained in the GUI.

Note:
During the Q&A session, you will be asked to present the work done to the module
lecturer and display the results through the GUI developed.

Level 2

APU

2016

EE038-3.5-2-ESA

Individual Assignment

Page 3 of 7

Additional Information:
In this assignment, you are required to compile a technical report (minimum 15 pages but not
exceeding 30 pages) containing the following:
1. Implement your software routines based on the given instructions; clearly label your
routines with comments to aid understanding.
2. Ensure your software routines are properly formatted, devoid of syntax errors and fully
executable.
3. Always take advantage of capability of the software in matrix-processing.
4. Submit the required software routines electronically as well as in text-based form.
5. Plagiarism of software codes will be penalised.
Assessment Criteria:
1.

Report format (Refer to Appendix A)

5%

2.

Report should include the following:

(75%)

Introduction
Design and flow of routines
Format and style of routines
Result and analysis
Discussion (Refer to Appendix B)
Conclusion (Refer to Appendix B)

3. Tutor assessment

5%
20%
20%
20%
5%
5%
(20%)

Presentation
Q&A

10%
10%

Grading Criteria:
Grading criteria is enclosed in Appendix C

Level 2

APU

2016

EE038-3.5-2-ESA

Individual Assignment

Page 4 of 7

APPENDIX A
General requirement on Report

The report must be formatted with a font size of 12pt if Times New Roman or a font size
of 11pt if Arial and 1.5 line spacing. Please ensure the paragraphs are properly aligned/
justified.

There should be List of Tables and List of Figures after the Table of Content.

The report should be in chapters and the structure should not go beyond the second level.
Instead of adding subsections at the third level you may use bullets if required.

All information provided must be straight to the point, precise and all information must be
cited accordingly and well presented. Avoid plagiarism.

All figures and tables must have a title and referenced i.e. indicate the source.

The report must be in binding.

Please also include the following in you report

Page numbering at each page (Page X of Y)

Figure and table caption font size : Times New Roman,10 pt

Position of figure and table: centre-aligned.

Level 2

APU

2016

EE038-3.5-2-ESA

Individual Assignment

Page 5 of 7

Appendix B
Instructions to Students about Discussion, Conclusion and Reference
Discussion
In the Discussion section you should give an overall appraisal of the results of your work. It is
here that you will have the best opportunity to demonstrate your understanding of the work and
to give a critical account of what challenges you were facing and your solution to these
challenges for the assignment completion.
Conclusion
The Conclusion is a short summary of the results of your work (about 200 words) and
suggestion on possible further improvements. The Conclusion should follow naturally from the
Discussion. It should give a concise statement of what has been achieved. Anticipated
application of techniques developed should be summarized very briefly. The Conclusion
should be self-contained, i.e., it should not make reference to any sections, figures, or
references in the report.
References
All references to books, papers, and other publications must be fully and correctly quoted to
be useful to the reader. Please refer to the Quick Harvard Referencing Guide document in
APU Library Homepage for guidance on referencing and citation.
Citation Example
In the text
The analysis of the varactor diode multiplier has been extensively reviewed by Scanlan (1989)
and will.
In the References section
Scanlan, J O (1989), Analysis of Varactor Harmonic Generators, Bell Systems Technical
Journal, Vol. 44, pp75-92.

Level 2

APU

2016

EE038-3.5-2-ESA

Assignment (Individual)

Page 6 of 7

APPENDIX C Grading Criteria

Name
TP Number
Criteria

Report Format
(5 Marks)

Introduction
(5 Marks)

Design and flow

of routines
(20 Marks)

Format and
style of routines
(20 Marks)

Level 2

:
:

Marks:

Fail
01
No or poor
formatting of the
report

Marginal Fail
2
Partial and
inappropriate level of
format

Pass
3
Appropriate level of
format with minor
formatting issues

01

Introduction not
explicitly defined

Grade:

Credit
4

Distinction
5

Appropriate level of
format

Unique and excellent level of

formatting

Attempted to provide
introduction

Able to provide brief

introduction

Good introduction is
provided

A very well written

introduction

07

89

10 12

13 14

15 20

No explanation and
no illustration of
flow-charts to
demonstrate the
design of routines

Poor explanation and

partial illustration of
flow-charts to
demonstrate the
design of routines

Basic explanation and

brief illustration of flowcharts to demonstrate the
design of routines

Good explanation and

concise illustration of
flow-charts to demonstrate
the design of routines

Excellent explanation and

elaborative illustration of flowcharts to demonstrate the
design of routines

07

89

10 12

13 14

Poor implementation
of software routines
and poor inclusion of
comments

Basic implementation of
software routines but do
not take advantage of
matrix-processing
capability of the software.
Basic inclusion of
comments

Good implementation of
software routines; clearly
demonstrate the matrixprocessing capability of
software in written
routines. Concise inclusion
of comments

15 20
Excellent implementation of
software routines; clearly
demonstrate the ability to
write simple but precise
software routines with
inclusion of matrix-processing
capability. Concise inclusion
of comments

No implementation
of software routines
and no inclusion of
comments

APU

2016

EE038-3.5-2-ESA

Assignment (Individual)

Page 7 of 7

Criteria

Fail
07

Marginal Fail
89

Pass
10 12

Result and
analysis
(20 Marks)

No simulation results
is presented

Wrong simulation results

presented and with no analysis

Partially correct simulation

results and weak analysis

01
No discussion on the
work done and
challenges
encountered

Poor discussion on the work

done and challenges
encountered

Basic discussion on the work

done and challenges
encountered

Poor conclusion of the work

done and further improvement
suggestions

Basic conclusion of the work

done and further improvement
suggestions

Discussion
(5 Marks)

Conclusion
(5 Marks)

01
No conclusion of the
work done and
further improvement
suggestions

Presentation
(10 Marks)
Tutor
Assessment
(20 Marks)
Q&A
(10 Marks)

Credit
13 14
Correct simulation
results and with good
analysis

Distinction
15 20
Correct simulation
results and with
excellent analysis

4
Good discussion on
the work done and
challenges
encountered

5
Excellent discussion on
the work done and
challenges encountered

4
Good conclusion of
the work done and
further improvement
suggestions

5
Excellent conclusion of
the work done and
further improvement
suggestions

8 - 10
Explanation was highly
appropriate and
coverage of the
complete work done in
the assignment

13

4-5

67

Did not turn up for

the presentation

Barely able to
explain what was
done in the
assignment.

Able to explain
sufficiently what was
done in the
assignment

Able to explain
clearly and in details
what was done in the
assignment

0
Unable to display
competency in
software usage

13
Poor display of
competency in
software usage

4-5
Basic display of
competency in
software usage

67
Good display of
competency in
software usage

8 - 10
Excellent display of
competency in software
usage

Marked by Dr Lau Chee Yong

Level 2

APU

2016