Competition Regulations...2019 Levels 2 3 4 Competition Regulations 7 ARTICLE C1 - Definitions C1.1 Australian Competition Season The standard sequence of Australian SUBS in Schools

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


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


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


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.


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


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


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


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


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]



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]




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.


[Advice]

[Advice]

[Advice]

[Advice]

[Advice]

[Advice]

[Advice]

[Advice]

[Advice]


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.


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]




• 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.


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.


[Advice]

[Advice]

[Advice]

[Advice]

[Advice]

[Advice]


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]


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


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]


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.


Specifications Judging | Article C4


Article C5 | Engineering Judging

ARTICLE C5 - Engineering Judging (200/ 150 Points)


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.



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


Article C6 | Portfolio Judging

ARTICLE C6 - Portfolio Judging (130 Points)


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.


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


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


• 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


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]


ARTICLE C8 - Verbal Presentation Judging (165 Points)


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


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.


C9.2.1 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]


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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





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




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


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


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


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


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



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


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


1300 204 478 www.rea.org.au