On Stellenbosch University's "Sunny Side Apple Packer"
Some of the feedback extracted from the judge’s report was that the Stellenbosch students submitted the "most professional" project with a "very good understanding of engineering, machine components and their capabilities". The levels of detailed explanation and content contained in the project documentation was considered "almost ready for tender", and the students showed a good understanding of how to "research possible solutions and innovate where necessary to eliminate risks”.
Why are you still in the university? Go out and do the same professional work in real life.
On the Tshwane University of Technology – AIR-BOT
When it comes to identifying a business problem, the judges felt that the AIR-BOT project was "well defined, backed up by good research and showed business acumen".
The fact that "this kind of product does not currently exist" it was also felt that the TUT students displayed "a high level of innovation and creativity with a well-structured manner of addressing the problem at hand".
On the University of the Witwatersrand's Automated Restaurant
A “brilliant and creative idea, and a perfect concept for the competition” was the conclusion of the judges. The WITS students submitted “fantastic documentation” and their “basic research and ideas were very good”. Another judge added that the WITS students have a “very good knowledge of engineering and presentation of it. Moreover their skills in creating drawings, video and 3-D modelling are really good.”
University of Johannesburg – BlitzBurger
Some of the Judge’s feedback was that the students from the University of Johannesburg submitted an “extremely creative and very brave challenge” with a “good effort in construction work” and “really good mechanical design”.
Some critical feedback for the next batch of students to take note of:
Problem Formulation
Problem definition in the beginning is different to the solution.
No market information about real need of such a machine.
Level of creativity is quite high, but real function is not clear.
Review of Literature
In terms of research, not enough was done. It looks to me that not enough concepts were looked at in terms conveyor and how conveying is done in current technology.
The requirement of an inverter together with the motor should have been gathered from the literature.
Market research is missing.
Way too much time was spent on mechanical design.
Design
One point missing: maintenance cost for the machine.
SEW application is good, except Movigear binary is not compatible with the CAN buss.
Linear actuator functionality of dispensing unit is either not described well or might not be working in the assumed / researched way.
Hygiene issues were not looked at.
Documentation
2 PDF drawings were faulty.
More importantly, no electrical drawings, but no one did that.
Energy calculations were not shown for the compressor which would use the most energy.
Where is the energy calculation for the pneumatic cylinders? The biggest consumer.
Not much energy calculations with compressor.
Very technical, less marketing documentation.
Very interesting project however no real conclusion.
Energy saving calculations was mentioned, but no real calculations shown.
Budget is not complete.
No tolerance in the drawings.