Risk Management in Engineering (49006)
Assessment Task 3 – Quantitative Risk Assessment and Decision Making
Specification:
|
Weight
|
50%
|
|
Type
|
Individual
|
|
Length
|
Maximum 4000 words including appendices and references for both Parts A and B
|
|
Submission
|
• Online through the Turnitin submission link on Canvas
• Multiple attempts permitted until the due date
• No FEIT assignment submission cover sheet is required
• The original files of drawing/modelling need to be uploaded as well.
|
|
Similarity
|
• There is no numerical threshold to show a student has plagiarised or not. The human academic checks for plagiarism. Turnitin can only indicate where and when a text appears similar to another text
• 20% self-similarity to Assessments 1 and 2 is acceptable
|
|
Due date
|
Two due dates, refer to the subject calendar
|
Objective:
|
Assess, evaluate, prioritise, and treat risks in engineering projects and systems lifecycle
|
Introduction:
To have a thorough understanding of what constitutes engineering risk management and how theories, concepts, methods, etc. can be employed in industrial practice, this assignment provides the opportunity for students to put their knowledge into practice by implementing the quantitative risk assessment and risk-based decision making methods in the case study investigated in Assessments 1 or 2.
Instructions:
1. Decide a good title for your work considering your case study. Title should accurately reflect the report’s main idea and its content.
2. Structure your report in an appropriate manner to include sections for introduction, case study overview, implementation of techniques and results analyses, risk evaluation and treatments, discussion and sensitivity analysis, and conclusions.
3. Write an introduction including contextualisation, topic importance, case study introduction, and objectives.
4. You need to follow the order of the techniques in your report: FT, ET, BT, and risk- based decision making.
5. Implement the techniques in the case study step by step and present the results. Analyse the results and highlight major findings. Tables and figures should be high- quality with adequate explanation:
• Develop an FT for the case study, including a table to show events and their acronyms and failure probabilities, draw the tree using software, and provide quantifications for the top event likelihood.
• Develop an ET for the case study, including a table to show events and their acronyms and failure probabilities, draw the tree using software, and provide quantifications for scenarios and consequences.
• Connect FT and ET and create a BT, estimate the risk for the main hazard.
• Convert BT to a BN model using GeNIe or other platforms.
• Follow your case study, incorporate some evidence into your BN, and report the posterior probabilities. Or report the most probable scenario leading to the main hazard and consequences.
• Propose some risk reduction strategies and select the best option using one risk- based decision making technique.
6. Please note:
• Hand drawing trees are not accepted.
• Copying and pasting trees from the literature are not accepted.
• If not using Word for drawing trees, you MUST provide the drawing files along with your submission.
7. Discuss the results and do a sensitivity analysis to make sure the results are reliable.
8. Write a conclusion of what has been done for what purpose and what findings are.
9. All content must be written without grammatical errors and must be fully referenced. Include references at the end that are consistently aligned with IEEE style.
Marking Criteria
|
Submission
|
Section
|
Criteria
|
weight
|
|
Part A
|
Introduction
|
|
Contextualisation
Importance/Relevance of the theme
Objective(s)
Report strcuture
|
5
|
|
|
Case study overview
|
Enough case study description including the system boundary, sub-systems, equipment
Setting the scope for risk assessment
|
5
|
|
Implementation and results
|
Correct modelling and quantification:
• FTA • ETA • BT
|
30
|
|
Part B
|
Correct modelling and quantification: • BN
• Risk-based decision making
|
30
|
|
Discussion
|
Sensitivity analysis and value added discussion behind subject materials
|
15
|
|
Conclusions
|
Summarise the work and highlight the findings
|
5
|
|
Structure and presentation
|
Well-structured and well-presented
|
5
|
|
In-text and IEEE style. referencing
|
5
|
|
|
|
Sum
|
100
|