Design and Manufacturability of Medical Ventilators from

Paper ID #34926

Design and Manufacturability of Medical Ventilators from the Perspectiveof a Global Automotive Footprint

Dr. H. Bryan Riley, Clemson University

H. Bryan Riley Ph.D., joined Clemson University in July 2019 and currently teaches controls and man-ufacturing processes courses. He has taught courses in signal processing, electrical communication sys-tems, EE capstone design, electric machines, adaptive signal processing, and hybrid and electric vehicles.Riley, who spent his early career in the automotive industry, has managed multi-disciplined and global en-gineering teams responsible for introducing advanced electronic features on production passenger vehiclessuch as enhancements to vehicle stability control (VSC), adaptive cruise control (ACC), and other activesafety features. He holds four patents and launched Provectus Technical Solutions, LLC, an engineeringservices company. Dr. Riley has implemented a Vehicle Modeling and Simulation Laboratory (VMSL)and current research interests include autonomous vehicles, sensor fusion, and smart manufacturing

c©American Society for Engineering Education, 2021

Design and Manufacturability of Medical Ventilators from the

Perspective of a Global Automotive Footprint: A First Course Development H. Bryan Riley, Ph.D. Clemson University

© American Society for Engineering Education, 2021

Abstract

During the past year, the advent of the COVID-19 pandemic caused disruptions in business,

engineering, manufacturing, and numerous other modern-day economies. The Manufacturing

Institute estimates approximately 2.4 million jobs in the global manufacturing industry will

remain unfilled by 2028 if urgent actions are not taken in the halls of academia to educate greater

numbers of manufacturing engineers. To this end, we have developed and implemented a split-

level (i.e., undergraduate/graduate) course during the fall 2020 semester in the mechanical

engineering department. The course is titled Global Manufacturing and is hinged on formal

paradigms that comprise various types of manufacturing systems. The course is centered on

realistic contractual conditions and project deliverables (i.e., medical ventilators) to a medical

supplier, whereas the team is assumed to emulate a global automotive manufacturer. The

projects are organized into student teams for realistic implementation and to meet a societal

need. The course underpins students with exposure to concepts of acquiring intellectual

property, from the design of an embedded system including the human machine interface (HMI),

to testing and validation. An in-depth study of assembly lines, lean manufacturing,

determination of production capacity, sequential operations, and economic calculations are

presented. Students are presented with urgent societal needs and learn to address design

requirements and imperatives in a timely and cost-effective manner. This paper reports the

experiences of students making engineering, business, manufacturing, and supplier related

decisions to deliver the medical ventilators for patient use. The assessment consists of sequential

activities that are commonly utilized in innovation, production, and launch processes for a new

consumer product. The course instructor formulates student teams such that individual skills,

interests, and competencies are balanced. The educational objectives from prerequisite and co-

requisite manufacturing courses are utilized.

Keywords: Global Manufacturing, Engineering Applications, Medical Ventilators, Student-

Centered Learning Projects

1.0 Introduction

The healthcare industry experienced a significant impact and endeavored to purchase adequate

quantities of personal protective equipment (PPE) and other medical supplies during the

pandemic. Increased demand soared and manufacturers worked diligently to meet demand. This

disease caused a severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus‐2 (SARS‐CoV‐2), that has

infected more that 4.2 million people and killed over 550,000 worldwide since mid-April 2020.

Experts from the John Hopkins Coronavirus Research Center (CRC) state this harmful virus is

considered as one of the most lethal pandemics since the Spanish flu of 1918.[1],[2]

COVID‐19 may preferentially infect individuals with cardiovascular conditions and is

considered more severe to subjects than those involved in serious auto crashes which is also a

public health and economic concern. At an estimated $871B in economic loss and societal harm,

the price tag for crashes is a heavy burden for U.S. residents. This includes $277B in economic

costs and $594B in harm from the loss of life and the pain and decreased quality of life from




injuries (U.S. DOT, 2016). As the project is implemented, an approach utilizing manufacturing

automation to showcase advance technologies and how achievement of geometric features,

dimensions, tolerances, and aesthetic appeal are achieved.[3]

This course was developed and taught during the fall 2020 semester to engineering students at

Clemson University interested in advance manufacturing as a career. The semester syllabus

presented in Table 1 was designed for the course to be self-contained such that prerequisites are

covered both a priori and sufficiently.

Topic Contact Hours

Course organization and introduction, review of rubrics 2

Global manufacturing facilities, market needs, economies 4

Innovation pipelines, processes and societal drivers 4

Proximity of resources, supply chains 6

Enterprise globalization strategies 4

Benchmarking: global manufacturing footprints (i.e., standardization, technological complexity, costs, Research, Development, & Engineering, capacity, and costs)

6

Implementation, requirements and constraints to launch/reconfigure a global manufacturing plant

5

Reconfigurable global manufacturing footprints: Characteristics and Challenges 6

Project Group Presentations 4

Review and Testing 4

Total 45

Table 1. Syllabus for ME 4930 / ME 6930

Lectures, interactive discussions, assignment of business case studies from The Harvard

Business Review, Cambridge University Press International Organization and presentations from

industry experts were incorporated. A semester project was the primary pedagogy instrument for

this course. Most importantly was the project-based experience of having the student undertake

a relevant and important pharmaceutical manufacturing scenario. The “Learning by doing”

approach provided the most relevant and impactful methodology for this course since the focus is

on application of the integration of past knowledge from various courses.[4] This course is

designed to aid in addressing the recent Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology

(ABET) assessment at the senior level in view of how students apply and utilize engineering

judgement and ascertain relevant conclusions from current global engineering challenges and

critical societal conditions that must be addressed via technology.[5] Outcomes of the course

will enable students to define and model the rise and fall of consumer markets and tailor




strategies that allow manufacturers to optimize specifying raw materials, maintaining a

competitive workforce, delivering valued products to the market. The project requires students

to consider how global manufacturing occurred through the twentieth century by evolutionary

events. These events are characterized by craft production, mass production, mass

customization, and currently personalized production. Figure 1 illustrates the progression of

these stages and the relationship to different manufacturing systems.

(Courtesy of Y. Koren) Figure 1. Society-Marketing Imperatives in the Manufacturing Paradigm

2.0 Survey of Literature

Global manufacturing is a multi-dimensional topic, and it incorporates many aspects of both

engineering and business models. Global manufacturing organizations are comprised of R&D,

advanced engineering and prototype design, pre-production, full scale manufacturing, and test

and validation. Supporting groups within the global manufacturing company includes

purchasing, finance, sales and marketing, supplier development and human resources. The

business model is driven by available capital, market demand and product differentiation.

Global manufacturing shall be considered as having five major components. These components

are classified as:

• governmental regulations and policies

• business conditions, tax structure and incentives/disincentives

• workforce education level and commitment

• transportation of goods, energy, and health costs




• infrastructure, engineering, and innovation

During recent years there have been significant changes in rankings of countries based on their

gross manufacturing output. Several countries have significantly increased their contribution to

the country’s gross domestic product (GDP). One such example is India, which improved its

output ranking from 14th in 1990 to sixth in 2015. In contrast, Spain dropped in manufacturing

performance from ninth in 2005 to 14th in 2015. The same is true for Russia, as it achieved

second place in manufacturing output in 1980 however it recently has dropped to 15th on a

global scale. At the top is China which leads the world in terms of manufacturing output, with

over $2.01 trillion in output. This is followed by the United States ($1.867 trillion), Japan

($1.063 trillion), Germany ($700 billion), and South Korea ($372 billion).[6]

The role of an advance manufacturing engineering organization can vary depending on the

company, product, and culture. Manufacturing engineering considers all aspects of

manufacturing consumer products within the spectrum of designing, to mechanical and electrical

components of the products, to automated assembly processes, to the supply chain that gets

materials to the factory. Many colleges and universities provide a track or concentration in

manufacturing. A typical job description may include designing assembly lines to meet a

required cycle time, selecting, and utilizing sophisticated computer-aided design (CAD) software

to design and fabricate products and systems, resolving production issues, and conducting

investigation of innovative manufacturing processes.[7],[8] Additional responsibilities of

manufacturing engineering focusing on Lean/Six Sigma methodologies, Key Performance

Indicators (KPI), Muda (waste) elimination, Value Stream Mapping (VSM), Kaizen exercises,

defining standardized work procedures, poka-yoke (error proofing), root cause analysis (RCA),

and identifying waste and inefficiency in production processes.

Here in the State of South Carolina manufacturers account for 16.81% of the total output in the

state, employing 11.55% of the workforce. Total output from manufacturing was $38.73 billion

in 2018. In addition, there were an average of 248,000 manufacturing employees in South

Carolina in 2018, with an average annual compensation of $72,715.66 in 2017.[9] As a land-

grant institution, Clemson University is committed to investing and creating an educated

workforce that sustains and expands the manufacturing economy to the extent a maker space has

been established at one of the innovation campuses.

3.0 Semester Project Description and Implementation

The following statement was provided the course instructor as baseline requirements and a

starting point for undertaking the semester project.

“Consider yourself as a vice president or someone that is a decision maker at a

global automotive company, let us say Tata motors in India, Volvo in Sweden, BMW

in Germany, or Ford and General Motors here in the U.S. Your government has

tasked you to deliver 50,000 medical ventilators to the healthcare market within a

period of 3 calendar months. The team as an automotive company should




demonstrate the capability of mass production, however you do not possess the

science, you do not possess the intellectual property, and this is not a core

competency for your organization. Yet, you can design a collective supply base to

your manufacturing operations, to achieve sufficient levels of proficiency with your

Intellectual Property (IP) through partnerships and produce these ventilators in

copious quantities in such a way that you will be profitable, you will be contributing

to society, and your employees will have the satisfaction with respect to

contributing during this pandemic. [How would you] think about organizing your

company, your resources, making decisions to manufacture and deliver medical

ventilators in massive quantities to the healthcare industry.”

To tackle the challenge of ventilator production, student teams were formed for the purpose of

representing talent from across the company, and leadership was designated. Experienced

company representatives from upper-level positions within the groups of North American

Manufacturing, Supply Chain Management, and Quality came together to lead the program. [10-

12] United States manufacturing sector has benefited from a talented workforce, advanced

technology, and pro-business policies thus incorporating a global view is expected.[13] The

student proceeds to establish a global company structure and is denoted in Figure 2.

Figure 2. Organizational Structure of Global Ventilator Company (BtN)

The students rapidly learn that effective organizations have dynamic and visionary leaders and

thus expanded the team by 550 associates in the global count. They elect the name B-Vengers

North America which is modeled in the global team after Toyota North America.[14]

3.1 Intellectual Property - Acquisition and Partnership

Medical ventilators and other electronically sophisticated devices can be manufactured within

the automotive domain; however, they must be re-designed and readied for higher rates of mass




production. From here forward, a team is selected and their experience is traced for the

remainder of this paper. This team selected the name “B-vengers Automotive”. “The B-Vengers

team elected to use existing intellectual property (IP) for our ventilator design, for two reasons.

A paramount requirement for this project is the achievement of a product cycle time that is

within the negotiated price which meets the timing and volume requirements of the automotive

company to remain profitable.[15] Designing a ventilator from initial concepts is a monumental

task, even if fast tracked for approval under the federal Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA)

Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). Secondly and in general, automotive companies have no

desire to enter medical device markets but are working to supply the world’s needs for

ventilators during this COVID-19 pandemic. Existing ventilator companies know their products

best and have the inherent experience, however the need for increased production is the driver.

Thus, a search for an appropriate IP partner began, noting the attainment of design and assembly

knowledge will be critical for an automotive manufacturer to be successful.

The World Health Organization (WHO) previously released guidance detailing the requirements

for ventilators being used to treat COVID-19. This guidance, along with FDA standards

provided the constraints and criteria for the ventilator design to be chosen. Some important

specifications to note from the WHO are:

Ventilator Operational Modes Ventilator Operational Parameters

Pressure control FiO2: 21-100%

Volumetric flow control Tidal Volume: 20-2000mL

Synchronized intermittent mandatory ventilation. In flow: 1-160 [L/min]

Pressure support ventilation – allows the patient to control breaths but machine supports pressure

In pressure: 0-40 [cmH20]

Non-invasive (NIV) capability with continuous positive airway pressure mode (CPAP)

10-60 breaths per minute (bpm)

Positive end expiratory pressure (PEEP): 0-20 [cmH20]

Plans include testing such that devices that do not comply with the above regulations shall be

rejected. Among the ventilators that follow these regulations, further criteria were established to

determine the most effective design, as well as its replicability. The manufacturing block

diagram is provided in Figure 3.

Corresponding important criteria for replicating the design of a positive-pressure ventilator (i.e.,

one that pushes the air into the lungs) are given as:

• Design for Manufacturing (DFM): The ability to ramp up the supply of parts is

critical to enable the mass production of ventilators. Parts must be designed for

manufacturing, that is quick and inexpensive to manufacture, for the ventilator to be

made without risk of down-time due to part shortages. Design for manufacturing

(DFM) is important because it focuses on the process for making the instrument as

much as the product itself.




• Design for Assembly (DFA): Similar to automobiles, ventilators have several

complex parts and sub-assemblies that must come together to make the whole system.

These parts must be designed with ease of assembly in mind to enable reduced cycle

time and greater mass production.

• Portability: Identified as a necessary function, for many ventilators travel in cases

when critical care moves outside the walls of a hospital, or to a mobile situation.

• Battery life: A portable ventilator must be capable of running off its own battery

power for sufficient periods.

• Form factor: A lightweight and more compact design is easier to handle, both from

an end-user perspective and a manufacturer perspective.

• A robust DFM process will enable a deep understanding of what can go wrong.

Various issues, including a flawed design, an inefficient assembly process, and/or

constant cost overruns will make it difficult to manufacture ventilators in the realm of

standard work.

Figure 3. Block diagram illustrating manufacturing sequence for medical ventilators.

The governing equation for takt time is given by Equation 1.

𝑇𝐴𝐾𝑇𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒 = 𝑇𝐴

𝐷𝐸 ≡

𝑇𝐴= 𝑎𝑣𝑎𝑖𝑙𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 𝑤𝑜𝑟𝑘 𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑢𝑛𝑖𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒

𝐷𝐸 =𝑐𝑢𝑠𝑡𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑟 𝑑𝑒𝑚𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒 (1)

where time units in the numerator and denominator must be the same.

Production requirements listed in Table 2 Ventilator Manufacturing Guidelines -Tasks in Time

Units.

Total Time [days] per Statement of Work (SOW)

90

Cycle time [sec/unit] 35.856




Development time upon receipt of intellectual property

7

Number of units plus 3% 51,500 Takt time [sec/unit] 38.88 Total cycle time[n/hf] 100.4 Total production time upon receipt of supply chain materials [hr.]

996

Total work time upon receipt of drawings [hr.]

1,080

Workday [hr.] 12

Table 2. Manufacturing Guidelines – Tasks in Time Units

Additionally, the cost model for production cost per piece or ventilator (i.e., Cpv,) is governed by

Equation 2.

Cpv = Cm + CoTp + Ci (2)

where Cm is the starting material cost in $/piece; Co is the rate of operating the work cell in $/minute; Tp is the average production time in minute /piece; and Ci is the cost of tooling as employed in a ventilator unit fabrication in $/piece.

3.2 Mandate and Contract

A corporate initiative reaching out to the executive branch of the government, offering to mass

produce ventilators, should a contract be offered. It was requested of the executive branch of

government to cover the cost of production. After talks, it was decided that the Defense

Production Act (DPA) would be invoked as part of the contract. Although B-Vengers did not

request a mandate to do this work, the DPA ensures the project is given top priority by all

suppliers.

A simplification of overhead cost is incorporated to account for labor and equipment rates as

follows in Equation 3.

𝐶𝐿 = 𝑅𝐻

60 (1 + 𝑅𝐿𝑂𝐻 ) (3)

where CL is the labor rate in $/minute, RH is the worker’s hourly wage rate in $/hour and RLOH is the

labor overhead rate in %.

The equipment cost rate and scrap cost are also factors for consideration.




3.3 Business Model

As previously stated, the students elected a business model which sets up a partnership between

Toyota Motor Company and Medtronic. The team will be utilizing Toyota’s facilities to mass

produce our ventilator of choice, Medtronic’s Puritan Bennett 560. Although Toyota has

facilities across North America, it was decided only facilities within the U.S. would be used to

comply with the customer’s terms and conditions (T’s & C’s) for transparency and oversight.

From analyzing all of Toyota’s R&D facilities and Engineering & Manufacturing facilities

across the entire United States, the decision was made to carry out the manufacturing and

assembling aspect of this project in the state of Michigan. To aid in our decision process to

which Toyota facility we would award this project, we sent out a request for all Engineering &

Manufacturing facility site managers to send us documentation reasoning why their plant would

be best suited to accommodate our customer’s specifications. Comparing these documents, it

was determined the facility in Michigan was the best facility to take on the manufacturing and

assembly of ventilators. Michigan is one of the few states that has both a R&D plant and an

Engineering & Manufacturing facility located in proximity to each other, making it the selection

of convenience. The students rationalized the need to incorporate modifications to Medtronic’s

original design of the “Medtronic Puritan Bennett 560” ventilator (see Figure 4) in order to make

mass production cycle times more efficient.

(Courtesy of Medtronic) Figure 4. Medtronic Puritan Bennett 560 Portable Ventilator

3.4 Design and Manufacturing Process

Upon completing an analysis of the ventilator assembly, the team decided to redesign several

components of it to better streamline the supply chain interactions. A value engineering exercise

was conducted to upgrade to a touch screen display, much like that currently produced for

Toyota’s automobiles. This saves the supplier from wasted time (i.e., Muda) reconfiguring the

validated HVAC control head assembly line. No degradation of the product quality was allowed.

Figure 5 depicts the human machine interface (HMI) which required modifying of the current

user touch panel. The embedded software to control changes bezel functions is a cost driver,

however this cost is neglected in the scope of this one semester project.




Figure 5. Automotive HVAC Control Touch Screen Reconfigured for Ventilator Use

The manufacturing system is straightforward considering these units are originally built by hand;

these units feature a laborious sequential and synchronous manufacturing process. The

manufacturing operation is intended to produce one single design, the assembly processes are

fixed and do not require a flexible manufacturing operation. The new system features to be

provided by dedicated manufacturing system is presented in Appendix B. Though this system is

not reconfigurable, it is easily replicable for high-volume output. As shown in Appendix B, the

takt and cycle time for these units is extremely high, considering most ventilator companies are

made at about a rate of 200 per month. With these tact and cycle times, it is implying that every

product is perfect, while the plant is running 12 hours a day, 7 days a week. Because this project

is levied under pandemic circumstances, the work schedule models readily.

3.5 Testing and Validation

Testing and validation proved to be one of the longest aspects of the the assembly process.

Based off research and collaboration with Medtronic, the average time to complete the necessary

testing procedure for each ventilator is around 6 hours. There are many different tests that each

ventilator must undergo. The tests will be listed in chronological order and include:

• alarm test

• O2 valve leak and O2 valve functional tests

• ventilator preliminary checks

• real time clock test

• FiO2 sensor detection test

• FiO2 sensor calibration

• pediatric volume and pressure tests

• adult volume and pressure tests

• clear ventilator logs




The student teams simulated the final testing procedures in a role-play fashion and as rapidly as

possible since borrowed test rigs were utilized. Test rigs allowed multiple tests to be done in

parallel allowing significant reductions in the per unit time. Additional research was conducted

to estimate that approximately 1000 test rigs will be required to ensure that these ventilators can

be tested and validated to make the deadline for this project. Floor space in global operations is

fixed cost and must be given consideration for realistic conditions.

4.0 Discussion and Results

During the semester each of the project teams successfully completed the project and presented

their findings and summary of experiences to the class. Each of the teams crafted and

implemented a plan that projected successfully manufacturing and assembling a total of 51,500

ventilators in the allotted time of 90 days. The simulations of partnering with established global

organizations such as Toyota and Medtronic enable student teams to utilize company resources,

begin devising plans, and implementing processes needed to meet our end goal. Segmentation of

project tasks or work packages defining specific work tasks as well as working in parallel,

provided manufacturing efficiencies and produced cost savings. The final project was closed via

a comprehensive written report, records, and supplier documents. Student comments indicated

“The experience and knowledge obtained was well worth the challenges and unknows at the

onset of the project.” Each of the students’ summary sections tied several aspects of past

courses and co-op experiences with the project to make it more realistic. It can be asserted that

the observations and knowledge gained were directly from the semester project outcomes. A

rubric was developed and utilized to communicate the semester project descriptors and assess the

outcome such that biases and inconsistencies were avoided. The project grading and student

guide rubric is provided in Appendix A.

5.0 Conclusion

This project can easily be extended for several additional weeks beyond the standard semester

length. As student teams formulated their ownership of the project, collected data, conducted

research, and incorporated their engineering judgements, the project gained greater significance

and meaning to the students. Nevertheless, each team exhibited and practiced realistic decisions

and were able to successfully complete the project, and by their estimates generated a small

profit. More importantly, the teams were able to deliver a device that was in critical need during

the COVID 19 pandemic. Engineering educators that have years of practical and industrial

experience may consider incorporating relevant societal issues which may motivate students to

intensify innovation practices and manufacturing skill sets.




6.0 References

[1] Zhou F., Yu T., Du R., Fan G, Liu Y., Liu Z, Xiang J., Wang Y., Song B., Gu X, et al.

Clinical course and risk factors for mortality of adult inpatients with COVID‐19 in Wuhan,

China: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet. 2020.

[2] John Hopkins University of Medicine Coronavirus Resource Center. Available at:

https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/. Accessed February 21, 2021.

[3] Jovane, F., Koren, Y., and Boxer, C., Present and future of flexible automation – towards

new paradigms: a keynote paper. CIRP Annals, November 2003. Vol. 52. No. 2.

[4] Pellegrini, T. (2016). Problem-based learning: Learning by doing. ICERI2016

Proceedings. doi:10.21125/iceri.2016.0328

[5] Clifton, C. F., (2018), The Undergraduate Curriculum: A Guide to Innovation and Reform

1st Ed, Routledge.

[6] Koh, A., & Chong, T. (2018). Education in the Global City: The manufacturing of

education in Singapore, 1st Ed., Routledge.

[7] Leitão, A., Cunha, P., Valente, F., & Marques, P. (2013). Roadmap for Business Models

Definition in Manufacturing Companies. Procedia CIRP, 7, 383–388.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2013.06.003

[8] Global manufacturing scorecard: How the US compares to 18 other nations. (2018). Global

Manufacturing Scorecard: How the US Compares to 18 Other Nations.

https://www.brookings.edu/research/global-manufacturing-scorecard-how-the-us-

compares-to-18-other-nations/

[9] South Carolina Manufacturing facts. (2020). South Carolina Manufacturing Facts.

http://www.bu.edu/eng/academics/areas-of-study/manufacturing-engineering/

[10] Duvall, B. J., & Hillis, D. R. (2011). Manufacturing Processes: Materials, Productivity,

and Lean Strategies (3rd ed.). Goodheart-Willcox.

[11] Kalpakjian, S., & Schmid, S. (2013). Manufacturing Engineering & Technology (7th ed.).

Pearson.

[12] Global manufacturing scorecard: How the US compares to 18 other nations. (2018).

https://www.brookings.edu/research/global-manufacturing-scorecard-how-the-us-

compares-to-18-other-nations/

[13] General Motors Corporate Newsroom, 2020-04-14, First General Motors-Ventec Critical

Care V+Pro Ventilators Ready for Delivery

https://media.gm.com/media/us/en/gm/home.detail.html/content/Pages/news/us/en/2020/a

pr/0414-coronavirus-update-12-kokomo.html

[14] Liker, Jeffrey K., The Toyota Way, 2nd Edition: 14 Management Principles from the

World's Greatest Manufacturer, McGraw Hill, 2021.

[15] Y. Koren, The Global Manufacturing Revolution Product-Process-Business Integration

and Reconfigurable Systems, Wiley, 2010.

https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2013.06.003

https://www.brookings.edu/research/global-manufacturing-scorecard-how-the-us-compares-to-18-other-nations/


http://www.bu.edu/eng/academics/areas-of-study/manufacturing-engineering/



https://media.gm.com/media/us/en/gm/home.detail.html/content/Pages/news/us/en/2020/apr/0414-coronavirus-update-12-kokomo.html

https://media.gm.com/media/us/en/gm/home.detail.html/content/Pages/news/us/en/2020/apr/0414-coronavirus-update-12-kokomo.html




Appendix A Global Manufacturing Semester Project Rubric Student Name: _____________________________________ Student ID: __________________

Project Team Name: _____________________________________________________________

Criteria Unsatisfactory Developing Accomplished Exemplary Total

Background/Introduction: Sufficiency in introducing and providing the necessary background to the project topic. Address relevant societal concerns.

/15

Design and Planning:

The project report discusses the design problem and the approach used to solve the concerns, in the “Background” section. The method is justified in purpose of the project. Realistic implementation.

/25

Workshop and Presentations:

The team’s contribution to the work sessions, presentations and/or posters and website development.

/15

Update Business Case, Value Proposition and Budget:

The business case shows a deep understanding of the economic impacts and benefits to the parties building the inspection robot. Assumptions and budget are justified.

/15

Writing Quality & Adherence to Guidelines:

Report should be well written and clear using guidelines. All concepts are explained; correct numbering of equations, labelling of figures and tables, and references are correctly cited.

/15

Team Dynamics: (Individual)

The student’s ability to work together in a team ask and answer questions and show in depth knowledge of the material/project.

/15

Total Points /100

Documents

Design and Manufacturability of Medical Ventilators from