competition regulations · c2.10.2 new arrangements regarding development class portfolio page...
TRANSCRIPT
Competition RegulationsLevel 2: ROV, Level 3: Spatial Design & 4: Submarine Classes
2020
Proudly Supported by An initiative of
Version 1.0
2020 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations2
AUTHORISED AGENTThe SUBS in Schools 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 136
Castle Hill NSW 1765P: 61 2 9620 9944F: 61 2 8079 0622
E: [email protected]: www.rea.org.au
COPYRIGHT NOTICEThis document, all its contents (including images, text, procedures) are copyright 2020
Re-Engineering Australia Foundation Ltd.All rights reserved.
REPRODUCTIONThis document may only be reproduced by schools registered in the SUBS in Schools STEM Challenge in Australia. Non-participating
schools in Australia and overseas must first seek permission from Re-Engineering Australia Foundation Ltd. prior to reproducing.To register your school in the SUBS in Schools STEM Challenge at no cost, click here.
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
2020 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations 3
Table of Contents | Introduction
TABLE OF CONTENTSPREFACE - SUMMARY OF MAIN REVISIONS FROM REVIEW OF 2019 SEASON �������������������������������5
ARTICLE C1 - DEFINITIONS ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������6C1.1 Australian Competition Season ............................................................................................................ 6C1.2 Australian Competition Calendar .......................................................................................................... 6C1.3 State & National Finals ......................................................................................................................... 6C1.4 SUBS in Schools National Coordinator ............................................................................................... 6C1.5 Language Used .................................................................................................................................... 6C1.6 Parc Fermé ........................................................................................................................................... 6C1.7 Event Programme ................................................................................................................................. 6C1.8 Judging Schedule ................................................................................................................................. 6C1.9 Terms and Conditions for Entry ............................................................................................................ 6C1.10 Regulations Documents ........................................................................................................................ 6C1.11 Key Performance Indicators (KPI’s) ...................................................................................................... 7C1.12 Trial Event ............................................................................................................................................ 7C1.13 Water Craft1 ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................7
C1.14 Project Elements ................................................................................................................................... 7C1.15 Engineering Drawings ........................................................................................................................... 7C1.16 Penalties ............................................................................................................................................... 7C1.17 Competition Levels .............................................................................................................................. 7C1.18 Booth Shell ........................................................................................................................................... 8C1.19 Trade Display ........................................................................................................................................ 8
ARTICLE C2 - GENERAL REGULATIONS �����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������8C2.1 Representative Team Selection ............................................................................................................ 8C2.2 Cost of Participation .............................................................................................................................. 8C2.3 Team & Project Entry Conditions .......................................................................................................... 8C2.4 Competition Procedural Regulations .................................................................................................. 10C2.5 Team Responsibilities ..........................................................................................................................11C2.6 Role and Responsibility of Supervising Teacher. ................................................................................ 12C2.7 Team partnerships/collaborations ....................................................................................................... 12C2.8 REA Corporate Partner Logos and National Support ......................................................................... 12C2.9 Mandatory Project Elements Submitted at Event Check-in ................................................................ 13C2.10 Project Judging Elements Detailed Information .................................................................................. 14C2.11 Project Elements Retained by REA Foundation Ltd. .......................................................................... 15
ARTICLE C3 - COMPETITION AND JUDGING FORMAT ���������������������������������������������������������������������16C3.1 Event Programme ............................................................................................................................... 16C3.2 Judging Schedule ............................................................................................................................... 16C3.3 Judging Panels ................................................................................................................................... 16C3.4 Who Attends Judging? ........................................................................................................................ 16C3.5 Students with Special Needs .............................................................................................................. 16C3.6 Judging Categories ............................................................................................................................. 16C3.7 Point Allocations ................................................................................................................................. 16C3.8 Judging Score Cards .......................................................................................................................... 17C3.9 Critical regulations .............................................................................................................................. 17
ARTICLE C4 - SPECIFICATIONS JUDGING (80 POINTS) �������������������������������������������������������������������18C4.1 General Information ............................................................................................................................ 18C4.2 Specification Judging Decision Appeals ............................................................................................. 18
ARTICLE C5 - ENGINEERING JUDGING (200/ 150 POINTS) ���������������������������������������������������������������19C5.1 General Information ............................................................................................................................ 19C5.2 Key Criteria ......................................................................................................................................... 19
ARTICLE C6 - PORTFOLIO JUDGING (150 POINTS) ���������������������������������������������������������������������������20C6.1 General Information ............................................................................................................................ 20C6.2 Key Criteria ......................................................................................................................................... 22
ARTICLE C7 - MARKETING JUDGING (190/205 POINTS) �������������������������������������������������������������������22C7.1 General Information ............................................................................................................................ 22C7.2 Key Criteria ......................................................................................................................................... 23C7.3 Trade Display Design Requirements .................................................................................................. 23C7.4 Set Up ................................................................................................................................................. 24
2020 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations4
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) ...................................................................................................... 30C9.5 Level 4 Trial Procedure (Submarine Class) ........................................................................................ 31C9.6 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 �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������34C11.1 Procedure ........................................................................................................................................... 34C11.2 Non Specifications Related ................................................................................................................. 34C11.3 Judge’s Decision ................................................................................................................................. 35
ARTICLE C12 - JUDGES ����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������35C12.1 Overview ............................................................................................................................................. 35C12.2 Chair of Judges ................................................................................................................................... 35C12.3 The Judging Teams ............................................................................................................................ 35C12.4 Judging Decisions ............................................................................................................................... 35
ARTICLE C13 - AWARDS ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������35C13.1 Awards Celebration ............................................................................................................................ 35C13.2 Participation Recognition .................................................................................................................... 36C13.3 Prizes and Trophies ............................................................................................................................ 36C13.4 List of Awards to be Presented ........................................................................................................... 36
ARTICLE C14 - APPENDICES �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������38C14.1 Development Class Trade Displays .................................................................................................... 38C14.2 Shell Scheme Trade Display ............................................................................................................... 39C14.3 Awards Matrix - Level 2 & 4 ROV & SUBS ......................................................................................... 40C14.4 Awards Matrix - Level 3 Spatial Design .............................................................................................. 41C14.5 Development Class Portfolio Content Page Plan ............................................................................... 42C14.6 Professional Class Portfolio Content Page Plan ................................................................................. 43C14.7 Portfolio Page Content Plan - Level 3 Spatial Design ........................................................................ 44C14.8 Criteria 1 - Specifications Compliance Score Card (Level 2: ROV Class) .......................................... 45C14.9 Criteria 1 - Specifications Compliance Score Card (Level 4: Submarine Class) (1 of 2) .................... 46C14.10 Criteria 1 - Specifications Compliance Score Card (Level 4: Submarine Class) (2 of 2) .................... 47C14.11 Criteria 2 - Computer Aided Design Score Card (Level 3: Spatial Design Class) ............................... 48C14.12 Criteria 2 - Computer Aided Design Score Card (Level 2: ROV & Level 4: Submarine Class) ........... 49C14.13 Criteria 3 - Engineering: Manufacturing Score Card (Level 2: ROV & Level 4: Submarine Class) ..... 50C14.14 Criteria 4 - Engineering: Design Process Score Card (Level 3: Spatial Design Class) ...................... 51C14.15 Criteria 4 - Engineering: Design Process Score Card (Level 2: ROV & Level 4: Submarine Class) .. 52C14.16 Criteria 5 - Portfolio: Project Management Score Card (All Classes) ................................................. 53C14.17 Criteria 6 - Portfolio: Portfolio Design Score Card (All Classes) ......................................................... 54C14.18 Criteria 7 - Marketing: Branding Score Card (All Classes) ................................................................. 55C14.19 Criteria 8 - Marketing: Trade Display Score Card (Level 3: Spatial Design Class) ............................. 56C14.20 Criteria 8 - Marketing: Trade Display Score Card (Level 2: ROV & Level 4: Submarine Class) ......... 57C14.21 Criteria 9 - Presentation: Technique Score Card (All Classes) ........................................................... 58C14.22 Criteria 10 - Presentation: Content Score Card (All Classes) ............................................................. 59C14.23 Criteria 11 - Trials: Rov Trial Score Card (Level 2: ROV Class) ......................................................... 60C14.24 Criteria 11 - Trials: Subs Trial Score Card (Level 4: Submarine Class) .............................................. 61
Introduction | Table of Contents
2020 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations 5
PREFACE - SUMMARY OF MAIN REVISIONS FROM REVIEW OF 2019 SEASONThis 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 2019 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 textThese regulations will be valid for the 2020 State and National Finals.ARTICLE C1 - DEFINITIONSC1.18 New definition of Booth ShellC1.19 New definition of Trade DisplayARTICLE C2 - GENERAL REGULATIONSC2.3.7 Updated arrangements for Development Class portfolios at National Finals.C2.4.1.3 Updated to reflect need for electronic submission only.C2.4.1.6 New Student Code of Conduct signed form required.C2.4.2.2 Updated wording reflecting requirement for electronic submission.C2.7.2 Updated wording to include requirement for student original work.C2.9.2 Updated wording to reflect Project Elements required at Event Check-in and removal of requirement for finishing evidence.C2.9.4 New requirement for Project Elements to be submitted electronically.C2.9.5 New penalty for teams failing to submit electronically by the published deadlineC2.10.2 New arrangements regarding Development Class portfolio page requirements at National FinalsARTICLE C3 - COMPETITION AND JUDGING FORMATC3.7 Updated points allocationsARTICLE C4 - SPECIFICATIONS JUDGINGC4.1.4.2 Updated with reminder to bring own tools to rectificationARTICLE C5 - ENGINEERING JUDGING - NIL CHANGESARTICLE C6 - PORTFOLIO JUDGINGC6 Updated overall points valueC6.1.3.1 New arrangements regarding Development Class portfolio page requirements at National FinalsC6.1.5 New advice regarding ReferencingC6.1.6 New advice and arrangements relating to introduction of anti-plagiarism softwareC6.1.7 New penalty for late electronic submission of team Project Elements.ARTICLE C7 - MARKETING JUDGINGC7 Updated overall pointsC7.2.2 Updated Trade Display pointsC7.2.2.2 New assessment criteria addedC7.3 Various wording updatesC7.4.1 - C7.4.2 New section for packaging requirements and updated wording for assembly of trade displaysC7.4.3 - C7.4.4 Minor updated wording through these sectionsC7.4.5 New penalty for non compliance with new packaging requirementsARTICLE C8 - VERBAL PRESENTATION JUDGING - NIL CHANGESARTICLE C9 - SEA TRIAL - NIL CHANGESARTICLE C10 - WATER CRAFT REPAIRS / SERVICING - NIL CHANGESARTICLE C11 - GRIEVANCES - NIL CHANGESARTICLE C12 - JUDGES - NIL CHANGESARTICLE C13 - AWARDSC13.4.4 Inclusion of Best Newcomer Award. Exclusion of 5.8 in calculating Best Managed Enterprise AwardARTICLE C14 - APPENDICESC14.1 DEVELOPMENT CLASS TRADE DISPLAYS - Updated wordingC14.2 BOOTH SHELL SCHEME - Updated name and inclusion of shaded Staging VolumeC14.3 - C14.4 AWARDS MATRIX - Criteria 5 Project Management - Separation of dual criteria , enaming of
5.4 & exclusion of 5.8 in calculating Best Managed Enterprise Award. Criteria 8 Trade Display - Inclusion of new criteria
C14.16 CRITERIA 5 - PROJECT MANAGEMENT - as per C14.3 - C14.4 & updated points valueC14.17 CRITERIA 6 - PORTFOLIO DESIGN - Removal of reference to plagiarism from 6.9C14.19 - C4.20 CRITERIA 8 - TRADE DISPLAY - New criteria 8.1, 8.8 and 8.9, updated points value
Preface - Summary of Revisions | Introduction
2020 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations6
Introduction | Definitions
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 DocumentsC1�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.
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.
2020 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations 7
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 Event1 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 PenaltyInvoked 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]
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.
1 Not applicable to Level 3 Spatial Design
Definitions | Article C1
2020 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations8
Article C1 | General Regulations
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.
C1�18 Booth ShellA Booth Shell is a system of walling materials used in different configurations to construct either backboards for Development Class teams at State Finals or a U-Shaped exhibition style arrangement for Professional Class teams at State Finals and ALL teams at National Finals. See APPENDICES C14.1 & C14.2.
C1�19 Trade DisplayA Trade Display is the final product that teams assemble within a provided Booth Shell configuration over a 2 hour assembly period. This contains all of the structural and visual elements presented for judging.
ARTICLE C2 - GENERAL REGULATIONSC2�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 2020, State Finals will only be conducted in SA & WA. Teams from all other states will proceed directly to the 2020 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 ParticipationC2�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 ConditionsC2�3�1 Varying the ConditionsREA Foundation Ltd. reserves the right to vary the Team & Project Entry Conditions where special circumstances exist.
[Eligibility]
[Eligibility]
[Advice]
[Advice]
2020 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations 9
C2�3�2 Team MembershipEach team registered in the Australian competition MUST consist of the following 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
1� PortfoliosDevelopment Class teams MUST restrict their Engineering and Enterprise Portfolios to 7 printed pages for State Finals. This restriction no longer applies for the National Final. For more information refer to ARTICLE C2.10.2.
2� Trade DisplayDevelopment Class teams MUST comply with certain Trade Display restrictions for State Finals. These restrictions do NOT apply to a National Final. Refer to ARTICLE C7 and APPENDIX C14.1 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]
[Eligibility]
General Regulations | Article C2
2020 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations10
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 RegulationsC2�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 signed and submitted electronically by the published deadline.
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 electronically by
the published deadline.• Team Manager and Teacher signature required.• 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]
Article C2 | General Regulations
2020 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations 11
C2�4�1�6 Student Code of Conduct Form (all classes)• One per team• Valid for the entire competition season• Team Manager and Teacher signature required• Must be electronically submitted upon finalisation of Team Registration
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. Some project elements will require pre event check-in uploading on-line to an REA managed google drive by the published deadline, the link for which will be provided by event organisers. Teams WILL be required to have a Google account for this purpose.
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 ResponsibilitiesC2�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.
[Eligibility]
[Eligibility]
[Eligibility]
[Eligibility]
[Eligibility]
[Advice]
[Advice]
[Advice]
[Eligibility]
[Eligibility]
[Advice]
General Regulations | Article C2
2020 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations12
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.
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/collaborationsC2�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 tembers and be their own original work.. 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 SupportC2�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.
[Advice]
[Advice]
[Advice]
[Advice]
[Advice]
[Advice]
[Advice]
[Advice]
[Advice]
Article C2 | General Regulations
2020 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations 13
General Regulations | Article C2
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. 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 (1) complete trial ready ROV• Two (2) identical printed A3 Enterprise Portfolios, bound or in presentation folders.• Three (3) identical printed A3 Engineering Portfolios.• One (1) 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. Booklet MUST be bound or in a presentation folder when submitted.
C2�9�2 Level 3: Design an Accommodation Space• Two (2) identical printed A3 Enterprise Portfolios, bound or in presentation folders.• Three (3) identical printed A3 Engineering Portfolios bound or in presentation folders.• One (1) 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.• One (1) 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. Booklet MUST be bound or in a presentation folder when submitted.
3 Not applicable to Level 3 Spatial Design
[Advice]
[Advice]
[Eligibility]
[Eligibility]
[Advice]
[Eligibility]
[Eligibility]
[Eligibility]
2020 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations14
C2�9�4 Mandatory Project Elements Submitted: Prior to EventAround two weeks prior to an event, all Level 2 - 4 teams will be emailed a unique link to a google drive folder that they will be required to upload their electronic data to. Uploaded files MUST be a team’s final versions they are submitting for judging. This requirement is an addition to the requirements in C2.9.1, C2.9.2 and C2.9.3. There is no longer a requirement to submit these files on a USB at the point of Event Registration.
• Enterprise Portfolio in PDF only• Engineering Portfolio in PDF only• Engineering Compliance Booklet in PDF only• High Quality Renders• ALL 3D CAD Files in STEP format only (Level 2 & 4) and Sketchup (Level 3)• Watercraft Finishing Declaration Form in PDF only• Media Consent Forms in PDF only• Code of Conduct Form in PDF only
C2�9�5 PenaltiesTeams failing to submit any of the required Project Elements as per C2.9.4 in the required format and by the required timeframes, will incur a 10 point penalty for each day or part thereof they are overdue.
C2�10 Project Judging Elements Detailed InformationC2�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 Portfolio is limited to:
C2�10�2�1 Development ClassState Finals: 7 PRINTED pages including the front coverNational Finals: 11 PRINTED pages including the front coverC2�10�2�2 Professional Class teams State & National Finals: 11 PRINTED pages including the front cover.
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, whichever applies.. 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.
4 Not applicable to Level 3 Spatial Design
[Advice]
[Advice]
[Advice]
Article C2 | General Regulations
2020 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations 15
General Regulations | Article C2
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 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.
C2�10�6 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�7 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�7�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 watercraftTeams 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�7�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�8 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.
[Advice]
[Advice]
[Advice]
[Advice]
[Advice]
[Eligibility]
2020 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations16
Article C3 | Competition and Judging Format
ARTICLE C3 - COMPETITION AND JUDGING FORMATC3�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, 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)
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.
5 Not Applicable to Level 3 Spatial Design
[Advice]
[Advice]
[Advice]
[Advice]
[Eligibility]
[Eligibility]
[Advice]
[Advice]
2020 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations 17
State & National Final Points Allocation TableSpecifications ROV & Submarine Spatial Design
Specifications 80 points N/AEngineering ROV & Submarine Spatial Design
CAD 65 points 70 pointsManufacturing 65 points N/A
Design Process 70 points 80 pointsPortfolio ROV & Submarine Spatial Design
Project Management 100 points 100 pointsDesign 50 points 50 points
Marketing ROV & Submarine Spatial DesignBranding 60 points 60 points
Trade Display 1306 /145 points 145 pointsVerbal Presentation ROV & Submarine Spatial Design
Technique 70 points 70 pointsContent 95 points 95 points
Practical Demonstration ROV & Submarine Spatial DesignTrial 200 points N/ATotal 9856 / 1000 points 670 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 2020 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]
Competition and Judging Format | Article C3
2020 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations18
Article C3 | Specifications Judging
ARTICLE C4 - SPECIFICATIONS JUDGING (80 POINTS)
C4�1 General InformationC4�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.Teams are advised to bring their own tools and measuring devices for rectification. REA will not provide these items.–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.
8 Not applicable to Level 3 Spatial Design
2020 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations 19
ARTICLE C5 - ENGINEERING JUDGING (200/ 1509 POINTS)C5�1 General Information
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 & Manufacturing10 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 C2.10.7.1). 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 & Manufacturing10 JudgingCAD & Manufacturing 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 product 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�1�3 Engineering Design Process
Engineering 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 CriteriaC5�2�1 CAD (65/709 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)
9 Applicable to Level 3 Spatial Design teams only10 Manufacturing Judging, not applicable to Level 3 Spatial Design
Engineering Judging | Article C4
2020 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations20
Article C5 | Engineering Judging
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• Rendering
C5�2�2 Manufacturing11 (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 (70/8012 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 Analysis11 / Design Specification13
• Ideas• Development• Analysis• Physical Testing11
• Evaluation• Overall Design Technical Merit
ARTICLE C6 - PORTFOLIO JUDGING (150 POINTS)
C6�1 General InformationC6�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.
11 Not applicable to Level 3 Spatial Design12 Applicable points for Level 3 Spatial Design13 Not applicable to Level 2 Large ROV & Level 4 Submarine
2020 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations 21
C6�1�3 Portfolio StructureEach Portfolio MUST be clearly labelled as either Enterprise or Engineering with the team name. To streamline the judging of team Portfolios, teams MUST structure this as TWO separate documents containing the following number of pages:
1� Development Class• State Finals: 7 pages including the front cover • National Finals: 11 pages including the front cover
2� Professional Class• State and National Finals: 11 pages including the front cover
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 the relevant scorecards and APPENDICES C14.5 and C14.6.
C6�1�3�1 Enterprise Portfolio• Project Management• Marketing• Skill Development & Linking Skills with Careers
C6�1�3�2 Engineering Portfolio• Engineering Design Process
C6�1�4 Judging process / procedureThe Portfolios will be assessed behind closed doors which is conducted during the course of the finals event. 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 electronic versions prior to a published deadline, as well as several hard copies of their Portfolios at Event Check-in for assessment by judges. Failure to submit the required number and correct Portfolio size will result in penalties being applied.
C6�1�5 Referencing‘‘Accurate referencing is important in all academic work. As a student you will need to understand the general principles to apply when citing sources and take steps to avoid plagiarism.Referencing is the process of acknowledging the sources you have used in writing your essay, assignment or piece of work. It allows the reader to access your source documents as quickly and easily as possible in order to verify, if necessary, the validity of your arguments and the evidence on which they are based.By referring to the works of established authorities and experts in your subject area, you can add weight to your comments and arguments. This helps to demonstrate that you have read widely, and considered and analysed the writings of othersGood referencing is essential to avoid any possible accusation of plagiarism.’’14
C6�1�6 Plagiarism‘‘Plagiarism is a term that describes the unacknowledged use of someone’s work. This includes material or ideas from any (published or unpublished) sources, whether print, web-based (even if freely available) or audiovisual. Using the words or ideas of others without referencing your source would be construed as plagiarism and is a very serious academic offence. At the end of the day, it is regarded as stealing intellectual property.’’¹4
From 2020, plagiarism detection software ‘Turnitin ’ will be used to check the authenticity of content in all teams’ state and national final portfolios.Content in team portfolios found to have been plagiarised, will not be assessed as part of the judging process resulting in zero marks for the relevant criteria.
14 https://www.macmillanihe.com/studentstudyskills/page/Referencing-and-Avoiding-Pla-giarism/
Portfolio Judging | Article C5
2020 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations22
Article C6 | Portfolio Judging
C6�1�7 Portfolio PenaltiesThe Chair of Judges reserves the right to apply penalties for teams who:• DO NOT submit the correct number of hard copies required for judging [10pt Penalty]• DO NOT provide hard copies in the mandated A3 size [10pt Penalty]• DO NOT structure their Portfolio as per C7.1.3 • DO NOT submit electronic copies by the published deadline as per C2.9.3 15
C6�2 Key CriteriaC6�2�1 Project Management & Linking Skills with Careers (100 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�2 What will be Assessed? Project Management MUST be contained within of each team’s Enterprise Portfolio in order to assess the following specific areas.
• Team Roles & Tasks • Scope• Time Management• Finance• Risk Management • Internal Communication • Stakeholder Engagement• Skill Development for Future Careers• Evaluation
C6�2�3 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�3�1 What Will Be Assessed? Judges will review each team’s 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• Writing & Readability
ARTICLE C7 - MARKETING JUDGING (19016/205 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 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.
15 10 Points per day or part thereof as per ARTICLE C2.9.416 Development Class Trade Display points for State Finals are less than Professional Class
[10pt Penalty][10pt Penalty]
2020 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations 23
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.
C7�2 Key CriteriaC7�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 (130 / 145 points)In addition to the general regulations governing Trade Displays, Level 2 Development Class teams MUST also comply with class restrictions as defined in C14.1 for State Finals.
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:
• Trade Display Design Development• Car Display• Information Design• Use of ICTs• Visual Design & Impact• Structural Design17 • Materials Selection & Use• Sustainability
C7�3 Trade Display Design RequirementsDevelop a ‘Design Brief’ that charts your team’s creative approach, design considerations (space, purpose), transport limitations (cost and assembly constraints) and environmental impact to comply with the regulations, inform judges and justify your decisions with the following in mind:
C7�3�1 CostsDetermine a budget and stick to it. Seek sponsorship of cash or donations of display elements.Consider ways of reducing costs through reusing and recycling structural elements.
17 Not applicable to the Development Class at State Finals
Marketing Judging | Article C7
2020 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations24
Article C7 | Marketing Judging
C7�3�2 ResearchResearch Innovative ideas and current trends online and/or seek a mentor in this space.
C7�3�3 Scorecard CriteriaRead carefully the Trade Display scorecard, Set Up and conditions within this document.
C7�3�4 Design ConsiderationsThe Trade Display serves two primary functions:
1� Externally showcase the team’s key messages
2� Internally store a team’s assets such as bags, tools and consumables. With this in mind, use 3D CAD to create a digital mock-up with consideration for:
C7�3�4�1 DimensionsRecommended maximum internal build dimensions of provided booth shell/backboard.C7�3�4�2 PortabilityThink flat-pack, modular, lightweight, pop-up, for ease of set-up and transportation.C7�3�4�3 SustainabilityReuse and recycle, particularly frameworks that can be reconfigured with new stretch or re-attachable banner materials.C7�3�4�4 MaterialsConsider fabric/textile options which are easier to transport, less prone to damage and more environmentally friendly as opposed to corflute/vinyl equivalents.C7�3�4�5 StorageDesign options for storage of bags, tools and top-up Marketing materials, as well as hide electrical cables and powerboardsC7�3�4�6 LightingIncorporate lighting to accentuate design features and brighten key areas of your exhibit such as product displays and promotional materials.C7�3�4�7 ShelvingUse shelves to attractively organise products
C7�4 Set UpC7�4�1 StageFrom 2020, ALL teams are required to comply with new packaging restrictions for ALL trade display items brought into State and National Final event venues:
C7�4�1�1 All Team ElementsALL team elements including structural components, banners, display items (e.g. show car, portfolio), electrical and electronic items, marketing items including give-aways and consumables, and tools and fasteners required to assemble the trade display but excluding ladders and uniforms, MUST be ‘staged’ in the booth shell. Non team members MAY assist with lift and carry only.All staged items MUST be brought into the event venue wholly contained within sealed or closed boxes, cartons, containers, cases or tubes.C7�4�1�2 Maximum Size of ItemsTo align with standard domestic and international, air and road freight maximum dimensions, no one item can be larger than:
• Boxes/Cartons/Containers/Cases: 1200mm x 600mm x 600mm18
• Tubes: 110mm in diameter18 (containing ONLY posters)C7�4�1�3 Combined Maximum Volume of Packaged ItemsWhen staged in the booth shell, ALL items MUST fit within a maximum volume of 1940mm x 1000mm x 1000mm. See APPENDIX C14.2 for futher information. Non team members SHALL NOT assist or direct with the staging/placement of packaged items within the booth shell.
18 Tolerance of 50mm applies
2020 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations 25
C7�4�1�4 ForkliftsNo forklifts or other material handling equirpment will be provided at State and National Finals by REA or the venue.
C7�4�2 AssembleC7�4�2�1 TimingA time period will be scheduled for teams to assemble their Trade Displays within the provided booth shell scheme arrangement, usually after event check-in and prior to the commencement of judging. Assembly will be conducted by all teams in accordance with the published schedule. A time limit of 2hrs maximum for each team will be enforced to avoid penalties.C7�4�2�2 Team Members OnlyNon team members are NOT permitted to assist teams with the staging or assembly of Trade Displays. All displays MUST be designed so that adult assistance is NOT required for assembling. This includes power, lighting and height issues. Step or full size ladders will NOT be provided, therefore teams need to factor this in to their assembly 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.
C7�4�3 Booth Shell Scheme InformationAll team booth shell 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, each provided booth shell will also contain integrated lighting and fascia’s.
C7�4�3�1 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 table coverings.For all dimensions, refer APPENDIX C14.1.At National Finals, Development Class team trade displays arrangements will be as per Professional Class teams. C7�4�3�2 Professional ClassAt State and National Finals, REA Foundation Ltd. will provide each Professional Class team with a self-contained booth 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 booths sharing one side wall and internal booths sharing two side walls.For all dimensions, refer APPENDIX C14.2.
C7�4�4 ConditionsTeams MUST comply with the following conditions:
• Development Class Teams MUST adhere to restrictions regarding Trade Displays for State Finals. See APPENDIX 2.
• Each teams’ booth shell SHOULD be fully fitted out for judging at the end of the 2hr setup whereupon photos will be taken.NO other items can be added to the trade 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.
• Teams MAY provide their own display internal walls and tables/cabinets so long as they strictly fit within the booth shell system provided. NO part of a team’s substitute internal walling system can encroach beyond or above the walls of the booth shell system provided by the competition organisers and systems MUST be designed so that NO part of the provided booth shell system (including the fascia framework) requires dismantling.
Marketing Judging | Article C7
2020 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations26
Article C8 | Marketing Judging
• 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 chair/stool specially designed for the display, and this MUST sit within the volume of the booth shell’s external dimensions.
• Booth shells will be pre-allocated to teams by the event organisers. Teams MUST use the booth shell allocated and booth shell walling cannot be repositioned by ANY team unless there is an obstruction or issue of WHS and this MUST first be approved by the Competition Director or Chair of Judges.
• At National Finals teams MUST design their trade displays to fit within the supplied booth shell without requiring the removal of the booth fascia. Removal of the fascia will incur a penalty. See ARTICLE C7.4.5.
• 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.
• Trade 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 trade display to ensure security. Note that competitions are generally open to the public.
• Trestle tables are NOT to be sat upon as they are NOT built for this. ANY damage to booth shell systems or provided trestle tables MUST be paid for by the team or their school.
• Workplace health and safety measures MUST be considered when teams are working at heights on their Trade Display.
• ANY electrical appliance (including power boards and extension cords) connected to the power supply MUST have a valid electrical safety test tag.
C7�4�5 Trade Display PenaltiesThe Chair of Judges reserves the right to apply penalties for teams who:
• DO NOT comply with Development Class restrictions at State Finals • 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 display 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]• DO NOT comply with ALL packaging restrictions [50pt Penalty]
C7�4�6 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 and compliance with timeline readiness of between 7-14 days prior to event start date. A copy of these guidelines can be downloaded from the Resources/Competition Documents Tab of the F1 in Schools menu of the REA website.
[10pt Penalty]
2020 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations 27
ARTICLE C8 - VERBAL PRESENTATION JUDGING (165 POINTS)
C8�1 General InformationC8�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 CriteriaC8�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
2020 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations28
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 General InformationC9�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]
2020 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations 29
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 thebin.
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.
Trials | Article C9
2020 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations30
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.
C9�4 Level 2 Trial Scoring (ROV Class)C9�4�1 Flotation and Water Column Positioning Trial (4 minute maximum)
• Move to surface and hold position 5 Points• Move to bottom and hold position 5 Points• Move to 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.
Article C9 | Trials
2020 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations 31
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
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• Way Point Voyage Layout
The 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�1�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.
[10pt Penalty if 2 members used][20pt Penalty if 1 member used]
Trials | Article C9
TYPICAL AREA LAYOUT
2020 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations32
C9�5�1�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�1�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.C9�5�1�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�1�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.
Article C9 | Trials
2020 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations 33
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 ScoringC9�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. 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
C9�6�5 Sample RankingTeam 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.
Trials | Article C9
2020 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations34
C9�6�6 3 Member Pilots
A 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 repairsC10�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.
ARTICLE C11 - GRIEVANCES
C11�1 ProcedureC11�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�2 Non Specifications RelatedSubmitted by the advertised deadline using the official on-line Grievance Form.
[10pt Penalty if 2 members used][20pt Penalty if 1 member used]
Article C10 | Water Craft Repairs / Servicing & Grievances
2020 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations 35
C11�3 Judge’s DecisionThe Chair of Judges decision related to any grievance is final and no further discussion will be entered into.
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 TeamsC12�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.
Judges | Article C11
2020 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations36
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.Students participating at a National Final MAY also receive participation medallions presented at the Awards Presentation ceremony.
C13�3 Prizes and TrophiesC13�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 Presented1� 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
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
Articles C12 & 13 | Awards
2020 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations 37
Awards | Article C13
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
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�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
AIPM: BEST MANAGED ENTERPRISE AWARDTeam with highest score for:
Criteria 5: Portfolio/Project Management, excluding 5.8
VISUAL CONNECTIONS: 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
BEST NEWCOMER AWARD19
Highest scoring team from school attending the National Final for the first time
19 Only awarded at a National Final
2019 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations38
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. 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.7.4.4 will apply. Development Class teams are eligible to use the entire volume of the booth as per Professional Class provisions.NO Trestle Tables will be supplied to Development Class teams 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.
Article C13 | Appendices
2020 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations 39
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.
2400
mm
2 0 0 0mm
1940mm
2050
mm
1 0 3 0mm
1000mm
960m
m 1000
mm
1 9 40mm
1000mm
Staging Volume (Shaded)
Appendices | Article C14
2020 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations40
C14�3 Awards Matrix - Level 2 & 4 ROV & SUBSROV & 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 Scope5.3 Time Management5.4 Finance5.5 Risk Management5.6 Internal Communications5.7 Stakeholder Engagement5.8 Defence Industry Mentors & Collaborators5.9 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 Trade Display Design Development8.2 Water Craft Display8.3 Information Design8.4 Use of ICT’s8.5 Visual Design & Impact8.6 Structural Design20 8.7 Materials Selection & Use8.8 Sustainability8.9 Packaging Restrictions
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
20 Not applicable to Development Class teams at State Finals
Article C14 | Appendices
2020 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations 41
C14�4 Awards Matrix - Level 3 Spatial DesignSpatial 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 Scope5.3 Time Management5.4 Finance5.5 Risk Management5.6 Internal Communications5.7 Stakeholder Engagement5.8 Defence Industry Mentors & Collaborators5.9 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 Trade Display Design Development8.2 Product Display8.3 Information Design8.4 Use of ICT’s8.5 Visual Design & Impact8.6 Structural Design1
8.7 Materials Selection & Use8.8 Sustainability8.9 Packaging Restrictions
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
Article C14 | Appendices
20
20
Lev
els
2, 3
& 4
Co
mp
etit
ion
Re
gu
lati
on
s4
2
C14
�5
Dev
elop
men
t Cla
ss P
ortfo
lio C
onte
nt P
age
Plan
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:R
oles,
Respon
sibilitie
s&
Interacti
on
***
Tim
e, F
inan
ce, R
isk
Com
ms,
Mgt
Too
ls &
M
etho
ds, E
valu
ation
*
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 en
cour
aged
to a
rran
ge th
e co
nten
t of t
heir
Ente
rpris
e an
d En
gine
erin
g Po
rtfol
ios
in a
ccor
danc
e w
ith th
is Co
nten
t Pla
n. H
owev
er th
e nu
mbe
r of p
ages
allo
cate
d to
the
sugg
este
d cr
iteria
abo
ve is
at t
he d
iscre
tion
of e
ach
team
. Tea
ms
shou
ld e
nsur
e th
ey re
fer t
o th
e sc
orec
ard
crite
ria C
ompo
nent
s of
the
Cove
r are
criti
cal t
o bo
th th
e En
terp
rise
& E
ngin
eerin
g Po
rtfol
ios
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
20
Lev
els
2, 3
& 4
Co
mp
etit
ion
Re
gu
lati
on
s4
3
C14
�6
Prof
essi
onal
Cla
ss P
ortfo
lio C
onte
nt P
age
Plan
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:R
oles,
Respon
sibilitie
s&
Interacti
on
***
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
Ev
alua
tion
*
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 en
cour
aged
to a
rran
ge th
e co
nten
t of t
heir
Ente
rpris
e an
d En
gine
erin
g Po
rtfol
ios
in a
ccor
danc
e w
ith th
is Co
nten
t Pla
n. H
owev
er th
e nu
mbe
r of p
ages
allo
cate
d to
the
sugg
este
d cr
iteria
abo
ve is
at t
he d
iscre
tion
of e
ach
team
. Tea
ms
shou
ld e
nsur
e th
ey re
fer t
o th
e sc
orec
ard
crite
ria C
ompo
nent
s of
the
Cove
r are
criti
cal t
o bo
th th
e En
terp
rise
& E
ngin
eerin
g Po
rtfol
ios
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
Port
folio
Pag
e C
onte
nt P
lan
- Lev
el 3
Spa
tial D
esig
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
44
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 are
enc
oura
ged
to a
rran
ge th
e co
nten
t of t
heir
Ente
rpris
e an
d En
gine
erin
g Po
rtfol
ios
in a
ccor
danc
e w
ith th
is Co
nten
t Pla
n. H
owev
er th
e nu
mbe
r of p
ages
allo
cate
d to
the
sugg
este
d cr
iteria
abo
ve is
at t
he d
iscre
tion
of e
ach
team
. Tea
ms
shou
ld e
nsur
e th
ey re
fer t
o th
e sc
orec
ard
crite
ria C
ompo
nent
s of
the
Cove
r are
criti
cal t
o bo
th th
e En
terp
rise
& E
ngin
eerin
g Po
rtfol
ios
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:R
oles,
Respon
sibilitie
s&
Interacti
on
**
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
45
C14
�8
Crit
eria
1 -
Spec
ifica
tions
Com
plia
nce
Scor
e C
ard
(Lev
el 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
02
0 A
ust
ralia
n T
ech
nic
al R
eg
ula
tio
ns.
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
20
Lev
els
2, 3
& 4
Co
mp
etit
ion
Re
gu
lati
on
s4
6
C14
�9
Crit
eria
1 -
Spec
ifica
tions
Com
plia
nce
Scor
e C
ard
(Lev
el 4
: Sub
mar
ine
Cla
ss) (
1 of
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
02
0A
ust
ralia
n T
ech
nic
al R
eg
ula
tio
ns.
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
20
Lev
els
2, 3
& 4
Co
mp
etit
ion
Re
gu
lati
on
s4
7
C14
�10
Crit
eria
1 -
Spec
ifica
tions
Com
plia
nce
Scor
e C
ard
(Lev
el 4
: Sub
mar
ine
Cla
ss) (
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
20
Lev
els
2, 3
& 4
Co
mp
etit
ion
Re
gu
lati
on
s4
8
C14
�11
Crit
eria
2 -
Com
pute
r Aid
ed D
esig
n Sc
ore
Car
d (L
evel
3: S
patia
l Des
ign
Cla
ss)
Judg
ing
Sub
Cat
egor
yC
ompu
ter
Aid
ed D
esig
nTe
am ID
Prim
ary
Evid
ence
VR W
alk
Thro
ugh
Dem
onst
rati
onTe
am N
ame
Seco
ndar
y Ev
iden
ceEn
gine
erin
g C
ompl
ianc
e B
ookl
etSc
hool
Cri
teri
a2
Com
peti
tion
Cla
ss
Low
Dev
elop
ing
Adv
ance
dSc
ore
Cri
teri
a0
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
/10
2.1
Desig
n inte
ntStu
dents
were
able
to ex
plain
at a b
asic
level
their d
esign
inten
t and
the e
lemen
ts wh
ich m
ade u
p the
ir des
ign
Stud
ents
show
ed an
unde
rstan
ding o
f the
desig
n elem
ents
and h
ow th
ey fit
ted
togeth
er w
ithin
their d
esign
offer
ing
Sign
ifican
t res
earch
supp
orted
the d
esign
inten
t, the
role
of the
dif
feren
t elem
ents
withi
n the
desig
n and
how
these
elem
ents
worke
d tog
ether
/1
0
2.2
Mode
l deta
ilMo
del is
basic
in de
sign a
nd
deve
lopme
ntMo
del s
hows
sign
ifican
t deta
il in t
he
eleme
nts w
hich m
ake u
p the
mod
elGr
eat a
ttenti
on to
detai
l has
been
mad
e inc
luding
the u
se of
ma
terial
s and
finish
es to
mak
e the
mod
el ap
pear
reali
stic
/10
2.3
Expla
natio
n of m
odel
layou
t
The s
tuden
ts we
re ab
le to
highli
ght
the ba
sics o
f their
mod
el an
d exp
lain
how
each
of th
e elem
ents
fitted
wi
thin t
he ov
erall
desig
n of th
eir
mode
l.
Stud
ents
were
able
to ea
sily m
ove a
bout
their
mode
l disp
laying
an un
derst
andin
g of th
e lay
out a
nd th
e way
each
of th
e elem
ents
fitted
tog
ether
to cre
ate a
cohe
sive e
nviro
nmen
t for
huma
n hab
itatio
n
Stud
ents
show
ed a
high l
evel
of un
derst
andin
g of th
eir m
odel
and
the ro
le of
huma
n erg
onom
ics pl
ayed
in th
e dev
elopm
ent o
f their
de
sign.
Tools
such
as hu
man m
anne
quins
wer
e use
d with
in the
ir mo
del to
help
expla
in the
envir
onme
nt
/10
2.4
Unde
rstan
ding o
f hum
an
ergo
nomi
cs
Basic
unde
rstan
ding o
f the i
mpac
t of
huma
n erg
onom
ics an
d hab
itatio
n ha
d with
in the
ir env
ironm
ent w
as
visibl
e
Stud
ents
show
ed a
high l
evel
of un
derst
andin
g of th
e imp
ortan
ce of
huma
n erg
onom
ics an
d sho
wed a
leve
l of re
searc
h int
o crea
ting h
uman
envir
onme
nts
A hig
h lev
el of
unde
rstan
ding o
f hum
an er
gono
mics
and
habit
ation
was
show
with
exam
ples o
f how
the v
irtual
3D m
odel
helpe
d the
desig
n pro
cess
and p
ropa
gated
desig
n cha
nges
/10
2.5
Use o
f hum
an
mann
equin
s to h
ighlig
ht de
sign i
ntent
Little
use o
f hum
an m
anne
quins
or
simila
r tools
to hi
ghlig
ht the
think
ing
behin
d the
layo
ut of
their e
nviro
nmen
t
Deve
loping
unde
rstan
ding o
f how
the u
se
of hu
man m
anne
quins
can b
e use
d to
deve
lop th
eir de
sign c
once
pts an
d des
igns
High
leve
l of u
nder
stand
ing of
the u
se of
huma
n man
nequ
ins to
dis
play h
ow th
e env
ironm
ent w
ould
oper
ate an
d how
all e
lemen
ts of
the m
odel
met th
e des
ign in
tent
/10
2.6
Engin
eerin
g Dra
wing
/sLit
tle or
no de
tail. L
ittle o
r no
anno
tation
.Th
ird an
gle or
thogr
aphic
proje
ction
. Ex
cess
ive or
insu
fficien
t deta
il.
Third
angle
ortho
graph
ic pro
jectio
n and
unren
dered
isom
etric
view
or
simila
r. Part
s list
/ bill o
f mate
rials.
Addit
ional
views
to sh
ow su
fficen
t de
tail. R
egula
tion c
ompli
ance
show
n./1
0
2.7
Rend
ering
Poor
quali
tyDi
ffere
nt vie
ws. S
ome i
ncon
sisten
cies w
ith
final
spac
ial de
sign.
Diffe
rent v
iews.
Perec
t matc
h to fi
nal d
esign
inclu
ding b
randin
g, en
viron
ment
and l
ightin
g. Hi
gh en
d pho
torea
listic
rend
ering
tec
hniqu
e./1
0
Com
pute
r Aid
ed D
esig
n G
RA
ND
TO
TAL
/70
Ap
pen
dic
es
|
Art
icle
C14
20
20
Lev
els
2, 3
& 4
Co
mp
etit
ion
Re
gu
lati
on
s4
9
C14
�12
Crit
eria
2 -
Com
pute
r Aid
ed D
esig
n Sc
ore
Car
d (L
evel
2: R
OV
& L
evel
4: S
ubm
arin
e C
lass
)
Judg
ing
Sub
Cat
egor
yC
ompu
ter
Aid
ed D
esig
nTe
am ID
Prim
ary
Evid
ence
Team
Inte
rvie
wTe
am N
ame
Seco
ndar
y Ev
iden
ce•
Mod
elli
ng o
n Te
am C
ompu
ter
• En
gine
erin
g C
ompl
ianc
e B
ookl
etSc
hool
Cri
teri
a2
Com
peti
tion
Cla
ss
Lo
wD
ev
eLo
pin
gA
Dv
An
ce
DS
co
re
Cri
teri
a0
10
1 2
2 3
3 4
5 6
4 5
7 8
9 10
/5 /10
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
thro
ugho
ut.
/10
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
02.
4 O
vera
ll C
AD
Tec
hnic
al
Mer
itBa
sic
CAD
des
ign
with
littl
e te
chni
cal m
erit
Dev
elop
ed C
AD d
esig
n w
ith s
ome
tech
nica
l mer
it O
rigin
al &
cle
ver d
evel
oped
CAD
des
ign
with
exc
elle
nt
tech
nica
l mer
it/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
(Eng
inee
ring
Com
plia
nce
Boo
klet
)
Littl
e or
no
deta
il. L
ittle
or n
o an
nota
tion.
Third
ang
le o
rthog
raph
ic
proj
ectio
n. E
xces
sive
or i
nsuffi
cien
t de
tail.
Third
ang
le o
rthog
raph
ic p
roje
ctio
n an
d un
rend
ered
isom
etric
vi
ew o
r sim
ilar.
Parts
list
/ bi
ll of
mat
eria
ls. A
dditi
onal
vie
ws
to
show
suffi
cent
det
ail.
Reg
ulat
ion
com
plia
nce
show
n./1
0
2.7
Ren
derin
gPo
or q
ualit
yD
iffer
ent v
iew
s. S
ome
inco
nsis
tenc
ies
with
fina
l wat
er
craf
t.
Diff
eren
t vie
ws.
Per
ect m
atch
to fi
nal w
ater
craf
t inc
ludi
ng
bran
ding
. Env
ironm
ent a
nd li
ghtin
g. H
igh
end
phot
orea
listic
re
nder
ing
tech
niqu
e./1
0
Co
mp
ute
r A
ide
d D
esi
gn
GR
AN
D T
OTA
L/6
5
Ap
pen
dic
es
|
Art
icle
C14
20
20
Lev
els
2, 3
& 4
Co
mp
etit
ion
Re
gu
lati
on
s5
0
C14
�13
Crit
eria
3 -
Engi
neer
ing:
Man
ufac
turin
g Sc
ore
Car
d (L
evel
2: R
OV
& L
evel
4: S
ubm
arin
e C
lass
)
Judg
ing
Sub
Cat
egor
yM
anuf
actu
ring
Team
ID
Prim
ary
Evid
ence
Team
Inte
rvie
wTe
am N
ame
Seco
ndar
y Ev
iden
ceTe
am E
ngin
eeri
ng P
ortf
olio
Scho
olC
rite
ria
3C
ompe
titi
on C
lass
Low
Dev
elop
ing
Adv
ance
dSc
ore
Cri
teri
a0
10
1 2
2 3
3 4
5 6
4 5
7 8
9 10
/5 /10
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.
Ap
prop
riate
ly c
ompl
ex te
chni
ques
and
pro
cess
es u
sed
to a
chie
ve 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
03.
4 To
lera
ncin
g / Q
ualit
y C
ontr
olLi
ttle
cons
ider
atio
n of
tole
ranc
ing
and
qual
ity c
ontro
lG
ood
cons
ider
atio
n of
tole
ranc
ing
and
qual
ity c
ontro
lEx
celle
nt c
onsi
dera
tion
of to
lera
ncin
g an
d qu
ality
co
ntro
l/1
03.
5 O
vera
ll M
anuf
actu
ring
Tech
nica
l Mer
itBa
sic
man
ufac
turin
g w
ith li
ttle
tech
nica
l mer
it G
ood
man
ufac
turin
g w
ith te
chni
cal
mer
it O
rigin
al &
cle
ver m
anuf
actu
ring
proc
esse
s w
ith
exce
llent
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
atte
ntio
n to
det
ail
Exce
ptio
nal a
ttent
ion
to d
etai
l acr
oss
all a
spec
ts o
f fo
rm/1
0
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
Ma
nu
fact
uri
ng
GR
AN
D T
OTA
L/6
5
Ap
pen
dic
es
|
Art
icle
C14
20
20
Lev
els
2, 3
& 4
Co
mp
etit
ion
Re
gu
lati
on
s5
1
C14
�14
Crit
eria
4 -
Engi
neer
ing:
Des
ign
Proc
ess
Scor
e C
ard
(Lev
el 3
: Spa
tial D
esig
n C
lass
)
Judg
ing
Sub
Cat
egor
yEn
gine
erin
g D
esig
n Pr
oces
sTe
am ID
Prim
ary
Evid
ence
Team
Eng
inee
ring
Por
tfol
ioTe
am N
ame
Seco
ndar
y Ev
iden
ceSc
hool
Cri
teri
a4
Com
peti
tion
Cla
ss
Low
Dev
elop
ing
Adv
ance
dSc
ore
Cri
teri
a0
1 2
0 1
2 3
4 5
3 4
5 6
6 7
8 9
10 1
1 12
7 8
9 10
13 1
4 15
16
17 1
8 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 env
ironm
ent
A w
ell-d
evel
oped
des
crip
tion
of th
e sp
atia
l env
ironm
ent,
suffi
cien
t to
desc
ribe
the
elem
ents
con
tain
ed 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
and
desi
gn o
fferin
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
re
sear
ch.
Seve
ral t
echn
ical
ly in
spire
d id
eas
for d
iffer
ent f
eatu
res/
func
tions
/10
4.3
Dev
elop
men
tLi
mite
d de
velo
pmen
t sh
own
Logi
cal d
esig
n de
velo
pmen
ts
expl
aine
dC
lear
ly ju
stifi
ed d
evel
opm
ents
bas
ed a
roun
d re
sear
ch o
n is
sues
of
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
re
sults
doc
umen
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. A
dvan
ced
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
hum
an fa
ctor
s
Exce
llent
ong
oing
eva
luat
ions
link
ed w
ith c
onsi
dera
tion
of h
uman
fa
ctor
s/2
0
4.6
Ove
rall
Des
ign
Tech
nica
l M
erit
Basi
c de
sign
pro
cess
with
lit
tle te
chni
cal m
erit
Dev
elop
ed d
esig
n pr
oces
s w
ith
som
e te
chni
cal m
erit
Orig
inal
& c
leve
r dev
elop
ed d
esig
n pr
oces
s w
ith e
xcel
lent
te
chni
cal m
erit
/10
Engi
neer
ing
Des
ign
Proc
ess
GR
AN
D T
OTA
L/8
0
Ap
pen
dic
es
|
Art
icle
C14
20
20
Lev
els
2, 3
& 4
Co
mp
etit
ion
Re
gu
lati
on
s5
2
C14
�15
Crit
eria
4 -
Engi
neer
ing:
Des
ign
Proc
ess
Scor
e C
ard
(Lev
el 2
: RO
V &
Lev
el 4
: Sub
mar
ine
Cla
ss)
Judg
ing
Sub
Cat
egor
yEn
gine
erin
g D
esig
n Pr
oces
sTe
am ID
Prim
ary
Evid
ence
Team
Eng
inee
ring
Por
tfol
ioTe
am N
ame
Seco
ndar
y Ev
iden
ceSc
hool
Cri
teri
a4
Com
peti
tion
Cla
ss
Low
Dev
elop
ing
Adv
ance
dSc
ore
Cri
teri
a0
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
/10
4.1
Req
uire
men
ts A
naly
sis
Lim
ited
deve
lopm
ent o
f ob
ject
ives
Goo
d de
velo
pmen
t of o
bjec
tives
Exce
llent
sta
tem
ent o
f obj
ectiv
es s
uppo
rted
by re
sear
ch/1
0
4.2
Idea
sSi
ngle
or b
asic
con
cept
sM
ultip
le c
once
pts
with
link
s to
re
sear
ch.
Seve
ral t
echn
ical
ly in
spire
d id
eas
for d
iffer
ent f
eatu
res/
func
tions
/10
4.3
Dev
elop
men
tLi
mite
d de
velo
pmen
t sho
wn
Logi
cal d
esig
n de
velo
pmen
ts
expl
aine
dC
lear
ly ju
stifi
ed d
evel
opm
ents
bas
ed a
roun
d re
sear
ch o
n is
sues
of
hum
an h
abita
tion
/10
4.4
Ana
lysi
sLi
ttle
evid
ence
of a
naly
sis
Anal
ysis
whi
ch is
rele
vant
and
re
sults
doc
umen
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. A
dvan
ced
use
of C
FD a
nd o
ther
des
ign
tool
s/1
0
4.5
Phys
ical
Tes
ting
Littl
e ev
iden
ce o
f tes
ting
Test
s w
hich
are
rele
vant
with
re
sults
doc
umen
ted
Qua
lity
expe
rimen
tal m
etho
dolo
gies
. Acc
urat
e re
sults
link
ed to
de
sign
revi
sion
s/1
0
4.6
Eval
uatio
nN
o or
lim
ited
eval
uatio
nEv
alua
tions
at d
iffer
ent s
tage
sEx
celle
nt o
ngoi
ng e
valu
atio
ns li
nked
with
con
side
ratio
n of
hum
an
ergo
nom
ics
/10
4.7
Ove
rall
Des
ign
Tech
nica
l M
erit
Basi
c de
sign
pro
cess
with
lit
tle te
chni
cal m
erit
Dev
elop
ed d
esig
n pr
oces
s w
ith
som
e te
chni
cal m
erit
Orig
inal
& c
leve
r dev
elop
ed d
esig
n pr
oces
s w
ith e
xcel
lent
te
chni
cal m
erit
/10
Engi
neer
ing
Des
ign
Proc
ess
GR
AN
D T
OTA
L/7
0
Ap
pen
dic
es
|
Art
icle
C14
20
20
Lev
els
2, 3
& 4
Co
mp
etit
ion
Re
gu
lati
on
s5
3
C14
�16
Crit
eria
5 -
Port
folio
: Pro
ject
Man
agem
ent S
core
Car
d (A
ll C
lass
es)
Judg
ing
Sub
Cat
egor
yp
Ro
jec
t m
an
ag
em
en
t &
lin
kin
g S
kil
lS t
o f
ut
uR
e c
aR
ee
RS
Team
IDPr
imar
y Ev
iden
cet
ea
m e
nt
eR
pR
iSe
po
Rt
fo
lio
Team
Nam
eSe
cond
ary
Evid
ence
Scho
olC
rite
ria
5C
ompe
titi
on C
lass
Low
Dev
elop
ing
Adv
ance
dSc
ore
Cri
teri
a0
1 2
0 1
2 3
4 5
3 4
5 6
6 7
8 9
10 1
1 12
7 8
9 10
13 1
4 15
16
17 1
8 19
20
/10
/20
5.1
Team
Rol
es &
Tas
ksLi
mite
d un
ders
tand
ing
of ro
les
and
resp
onsi
bilit
ies
Team
role
s an
d re
spon
sibi
litie
s id
entifi
ed
Hig
hly
stru
ctur
ed te
am w
ith c
lear
role
s an
d re
spon
sibi
litie
s. A
ll te
am
mem
bers
pro
vide
crit
ical
con
tribu
tions
with
evi
denc
e of
sup
porti
ve/
over
lapp
ing
inte
ract
ions
. R
elev
ant s
kill
deve
lopm
ent/
men
torin
g un
derta
ken.
Pla
n C
hang
es d
iscu
ssed
/10
5.2
Scop
e Li
mite
d un
ders
tand
ing
of s
cope
Som
e at
tem
pts
at s
cope
de
com
posi
tion
Exce
llent
con
trol o
f all
proj
ect d
eliv
erab
les
unde
rsta
ndin
g re
quire
men
ts a
nd s
ettin
g go
als
to m
aint
ain
focu
s Pl
an C
hang
es
disc
usse
d/1
0
5.3
Tim
e M
anag
emen
tLi
mite
d ev
iden
ce o
f tim
e m
anag
emen
t
Som
e pl
anni
ng u
sed
to g
uide
pr
ogre
ss o
f pro
ject
goa
ls a
nd s
tay
on
task
.
Exte
nsiv
e ev
iden
ce o
f usi
ng e
ffect
ive
man
agem
ent m
etho
ds a
nd
tool
s to
sta
y on
task
and
mee
t dea
dlin
es.
/10
5.4
Fina
nce
Lim
ited
budg
etin
g aw
aren
ess
Som
e re
sour
ces
iden
tified
, bud
getin
g an
d pr
ojec
t con
tinge
ncy
cons
ider
ed.
Exce
llent
reso
urce
man
agem
ent,
unde
rsta
ndin
g of
bud
get c
ontro
l an
d ev
iden
ce o
f fina
ncia
l acc
ount
ing
met
hods
incl
udin
g tra
ckin
g of
ac
tual
spe
nd a
gain
st b
udge
t./1
0
5.5
Ris
k M
anag
emen
tLi
mite
d ris
k aw
aren
ess
Som
e co
ntin
genc
y pl
ans
in p
lace
.R
easo
nabl
e co
ntin
genc
y pl
an a
nd ri
sk a
sses
smen
t pre
pare
d an
d/or
un
derta
ken.
/10
5.6
Inte
rnal
Com
mun
icat
ion
Lim
ited
team
co
mm
unic
atio
nBa
sic
team
com
mun
icat
ion
proc
esse
s di
scus
sed
Exce
llent
use
of m
ultip
le c
omm
unic
atio
n to
ols
and
met
hods
for
effec
tive
team
pla
nnin
g an
d ac
coun
tabi
lity
/10
5.7
Stak
ehol
der
Enga
gem
ent
Lim
ited
stak
ehol
der
enga
gem
ent
Basi
c un
ders
tand
ing
and
appl
icat
ion
of s
take
hold
er e
ngag
emen
t
Exce
llent
und
erst
andi
ng a
nd a
pplic
atio
n of
initi
atin
g an
d m
aint
aini
ng
stak
ehol
der e
ngag
emen
t with
col
labo
rato
rs, s
pons
ors,
men
tors
and
su
ppor
ters
usi
ng m
ultip
le to
ols
and
met
hods
/10
5.8
Skill
Dev
elop
men
t for
Fu
ture
Car
eers
1
No
or li
ttle
effor
t to
iden
tify
skills
and
lin
k th
em to
Def
ence
In
dust
ry c
aree
rs
A go
od e
ffort
by th
e te
am to
iden
tify
indi
vidu
al s
kills
dev
elop
ed b
ut m
ore
wor
k ne
eded
to li
nk th
ese
with
D
efen
ce In
dust
ry c
aree
rs
Dem
onst
rabl
e ev
iden
ce in
por
tfolio
by
team
to id
entif
y an
d re
cord
se
vera
l ind
ustry
spe
cific
and
em
ploy
abilit
y sk
ills d
evel
oped
thro
ugh
thei
r par
ticip
atio
n in
Sub
s in
Sch
ools
and
how
thes
e ca
n lin
k to
ca
reer
s w
ithin
Def
ence
Indu
strie
s
/20
5.9
Eval
uatio
nLi
mite
d ev
alua
tion
Som
e ev
alua
tion
appl
ied
Eval
uatio
n pr
oces
ses
appl
ied
thro
ugho
ut th
e m
anag
emen
t of k
ey
deliv
erab
les
/10
Port
folio
Pro
ject
Man
agem
ent G
RA
ND
TO
TAL
/100
1 Th
is cri
terion
NOT
inclu
ded i
n calc
ulatio
n of B
est M
anag
ed E
nterp
rise A
ward
Ap
pen
dic
es
|
Art
icle
C14
20
20
Lev
els
2, 3
& 4
Co
mp
etit
ion
Re
gu
lati
on
s5
4
C14
�17
Crit
eria
6 -
Port
folio
: Por
tfolio
Des
ign
Scor
e C
ard
(All
Cla
sses
)
Judg
ing
Sub
Cat
egor
yC
lari
ty &
Qua
lity
Team
IDPr
imar
y Ev
iden
ceTe
am E
ngin
eeri
ng &
Ent
erpr
ise
Port
foli
oTe
am N
ame
Seco
ndar
y Ev
iden
ceSc
hool
Cri
teri
a6
Com
peti
tion
Cla
ss
Low
Dev
elop
ing
Adv
ance
dSc
ore
Cri
teri
a0
1 2
34
5/5
6.1
Prod
uctio
n Q
ualit
y of
M
ater
ials
Poor
qua
lity
Basi
c pr
intin
g an
d bi
ndin
gQ
ualit
y pr
inte
d do
cum
ent o
n qu
ality
pap
er in
app
ropr
iate
ly d
urab
le
bind
ing
/5
6.2
Prod
uctio
n Q
ualit
y of
C
onte
ntM
issi
ng d
ocum
enta
tion
Basi
c do
cum
enta
tion
prov
ided
Cor
rect
num
ber o
f pag
es. A
ll re
quire
d do
cum
enta
tion
incl
uded
and
pr
ofes
sion
ally
pre
sent
ed. S
ub re
nder
ing
and
team
logo
on
cove
r pag
e in
ke
epin
g w
ith b
rand
ing
/5
6.3
Con
tent
Org
anis
atio
nD
isor
gani
sed
cont
ent
Som
e co
nten
t org
anis
atio
nH
ighl
y or
gani
sed
and
man
aged
por
tfolio
con
tent
with
logi
cal s
truct
ure
and
flow
of i
nfor
mat
ion
/5
6.4
Layo
ut D
esig
nD
istra
ctin
g im
perfe
ctio
ns
wea
ken
the
wor
kSo
me
layo
ut d
esig
n fo
rmat
at
tem
pted
Wel
l for
mat
ted
layo
ut d
esig
n co
nsis
tent
ly a
pply
ing
mar
gins
, alig
nmen
t, sp
acin
g, g
raph
ics
and
desi
gn e
lem
ents
with
con
side
ratio
n of
vis
ual
bala
nce
and
flow.
All
page
s op
timal
ly u
sed
and
uncl
utte
red.
Cre
ativ
e st
yle
real
ised
/5
6.5
Typo
grap
hyFo
nt c
hoic
es a
re
dist
ract
ing
or w
eake
n th
e w
ork
Som
e co
nsid
erat
ion
for t
ype
treat
men
t
Con
sist
ent u
se o
f typ
ogra
phy
with
app
ropr
iate
cho
ices
and
lim
ited
num
ber o
f tex
t and
hea
dlin
e fo
nt s
izes
, sty
les,
col
ours
and
hie
rarc
hy. I
n ke
epin
g w
ith b
rand
ing.
Eas
y to
read
/5
6.6
Phot
os &
Imag
esPo
or q
ualit
y or
use
of
imag
es. N
o ca
ptio
ning
Basi
c qu
ality
and
use
of
imag
es. S
ome
reas
onab
ly
conc
ise
capt
ioni
ng
Just
ified
use
of e
xcel
lent
, un-
pixe
llate
d, c
lear
, und
isto
rted
phot
os a
nd
imag
es th
at a
re c
onci
sely
and
acc
urat
ely
capt
ione
d. P
rope
rly s
ized
, co
lour
ed a
nd in
tegr
ated
with
text
to il
lust
rate
key
mes
sage
s. C
onsi
ders
br
andi
ng
/5
6.7
Cre
ativ
e G
raph
ics
(Vis
ual e
ffect
s an
d in
fogr
aphi
cs)
Poor
gra
phic
s an
d/or
ex
ecut
ion.
No
capt
ioni
ng
Gra
phic
s at
tem
pted
with
som
e su
cces
s. S
ome
reas
onab
ly
conc
ise
capt
ioni
ng
Just
ified
, wel
l exe
cute
d an
d pl
aced
, un-
pixe
llate
d, u
ndis
torte
d gr
aphi
cs
that
are
con
cise
ly a
nd a
ccur
atel
y ca
ptio
ned.
Con
sist
ent u
se o
f col
our/
tone
s/ s
hape
s, w
ithou
t vis
ual o
verlo
ad, i
n ke
epin
g w
ith b
rand
ing
/5
6.8
Editi
ng/P
roof
read
ing
Erro
r rid
den.
Poo
r atte
mpt
at
pro
ofre
adin
gG
ood
atte
mpt
with
add
ition
al
editi
ng re
quire
d fo
r cla
rity
No
erro
rs d
etec
ted
in te
xt a
nd g
raph
ics
/5
6.9
Ref
eren
cing
Obv
ious
failu
res
in
refe
renc
ing
Som
e at
tem
pt a
t ref
eren
cing
. So
me
erro
rs e
vide
ntEx
celle
nt u
se o
f ref
eren
cing
for a
utho
r’s w
ritte
n w
ord,
gra
phic
s/ph
otos
an
d vi
deo
sour
ces
etc
/5
6.10
W
ritin
g &
Rea
dabi
lity
Diffi
cult
to u
nder
stan
d.
Una
ble
to re
adD
oes
not s
usta
in re
adin
g or
in
tere
st. D
oes
not ‘
flow
’C
onci
se, a
ppro
pria
te, g
ram
mat
ical
ly c
orre
ct te
xt, c
aptio
ns, a
nd
head
lines
. Inv
iting
and
eng
agin
g. S
usta
ins
the
read
er’s
inte
rest
/5
Port
folio
Cla
rity
& Q
ualit
y G
RA
ND
TO
TAL
/50
Ap
pen
dic
es
|
Art
icle
C14
20
20
Lev
els
2, 3
& 4
Co
mp
etit
ion
Re
gu
lati
on
s5
5
C14
�17
Crit
eria
6 -
Port
folio
: Por
tfolio
Des
ign
Scor
e C
ard
(All
Cla
sses
)
Judg
ing
Sub
Cat
egor
yC
lari
ty &
Qua
lity
Team
IDPr
imar
y Ev
iden
ceTe
am E
ngin
eeri
ng &
Ent
erpr
ise
Port
foli
oTe
am N
ame
Seco
ndar
y Ev
iden
ceSc
hool
Cri
teri
a6
Com
peti
tion
Cla
ss
Low
Dev
elop
ing
Adv
ance
dSc
ore
Cri
teri
a0
1 2
34
5/5
6.1
Prod
uctio
n Q
ualit
y of
M
ater
ials
Poor
qua
lity
Basi
c pr
intin
g an
d bi
ndin
gQ
ualit
y pr
inte
d do
cum
ent o
n qu
ality
pap
er in
app
ropr
iate
ly d
urab
le
bind
ing
/5
6.2
Prod
uctio
n Q
ualit
y of
C
onte
ntM
issi
ng d
ocum
enta
tion
Basi
c do
cum
enta
tion
prov
ided
Cor
rect
num
ber o
f pag
es. A
ll re
quire
d do
cum
enta
tion
incl
uded
and
pr
ofes
sion
ally
pre
sent
ed. S
ub re
nder
ing
and
team
logo
on
cove
r pag
e in
ke
epin
g w
ith b
rand
ing
/5
6.3
Con
tent
Org
anis
atio
nD
isor
gani
sed
cont
ent
Som
e co
nten
t org
anis
atio
nH
ighl
y or
gani
sed
and
man
aged
por
tfolio
con
tent
with
logi
cal s
truct
ure
and
flow
of i
nfor
mat
ion
/5
6.4
Layo
ut D
esig
nD
istra
ctin
g im
perfe
ctio
ns
wea
ken
the
wor
kSo
me
layo
ut d
esig
n fo
rmat
at
tem
pted
Wel
l for
mat
ted
layo
ut d
esig
n co
nsis
tent
ly a
pply
ing
mar
gins
, alig
nmen
t, sp
acin
g, g
raph
ics
and
desi
gn e
lem
ents
with
con
side
ratio
n of
vis
ual
bala
nce
and
flow.
All
page
s op
timal
ly u
sed
and
uncl
utte
red.
Cre
ativ
e st
yle
real
ised
/5
6.5
Typo
grap
hyFo
nt c
hoic
es a
re
dist
ract
ing
or w
eake
n th
e w
ork
Som
e co
nsid
erat
ion
for t
ype
treat
men
t
Con
sist
ent u
se o
f typ
ogra
phy
with
app
ropr
iate
cho
ices
and
lim
ited
num
ber o
f tex
t and
hea
dlin
e fo
nt s
izes
, sty
les,
col
ours
and
hie
rarc
hy. I
n ke
epin
g w
ith b
rand
ing.
Eas
y to
read
/5
6.6
Phot
os &
Imag
esPo
or q
ualit
y or
use
of
imag
es. N
o ca
ptio
ning
Basi
c qu
ality
and
use
of
imag
es. S
ome
reas
onab
ly
conc
ise
capt
ioni
ng
Just
ified
use
of e
xcel
lent
, un-
pixe
llate
d, c
lear
, und
isto
rted
phot
os a
nd
imag
es th
at a
re c
onci
sely
and
acc
urat
ely
capt
ione
d. P
rope
rly s
ized
, co
lour
ed a
nd in
tegr
ated
with
text
to il
lust
rate
key
mes
sage
s. C
onsi
ders
br
andi
ng
/5
6.7
Cre
ativ
e G
raph
ics
(Vis
ual e
ffect
s an
d in
fogr
aphi
cs)
Poor
gra
phic
s an
d/or
ex
ecut
ion.
No
capt
ioni
ng
Gra
phic
s at
tem
pted
with
som
e su
cces
s. S
ome
reas
onab
ly
conc
ise
capt
ioni
ng
Just
ified
, wel
l exe
cute
d an
d pl
aced
, un-
pixe
llate
d, u
ndis
torte
d gr
aphi
cs
that
are
con
cise
ly a
nd a
ccur
atel
y ca
ptio
ned.
Con
sist
ent u
se o
f col
our/
tone
s/ s
hape
s, w
ithou
t vis
ual o
verlo
ad, i
n ke
epin
g w
ith b
rand
ing
/5
6.8
Editi
ng/P
roof
read
ing
Erro
r rid
den.
Poo
r atte
mpt
at
pro
ofre
adin
gG
ood
atte
mpt
with
add
ition
al
editi
ng re
quire
d fo
r cla
rity
No
erro
rs d
etec
ted
in te
xt a
nd g
raph
ics
/5
6.9
Ref
eren
cing
Obv
ious
failu
res
in
refe
renc
ing
Som
e at
tem
pt a
t ref
eren
cing
. So
me
erro
rs e
vide
ntEx
celle
nt u
se o
f ref
eren
cing
for a
utho
r’s w
ritte
n w
ord,
gra
phic
s/ph
otos
an
d vi
deo
sour
ces
etc
/5
6.10
W
ritin
g &
Rea
dabi
lity
Diffi
cult
to u
nder
stan
d.
Una
ble
to re
adD
oes
not s
usta
in re
adin
g or
in
tere
st. D
oes
not ‘
flow
’C
onci
se, a
ppro
pria
te, g
ram
mat
ical
ly c
orre
ct te
xt, c
aptio
ns, a
nd
head
lines
. Inv
iting
and
eng
agin
g. S
usta
ins
the
read
er’s
inte
rest
/5
Port
folio
Cla
rity
& Q
ualit
y G
RA
ND
TO
TAL
/50
C14
�18
Crit
eria
7 -
Mar
ketin
g: B
rand
ing
Scor
e C
ard
(All
Cla
sses
)
Judg
ing
Sub
Cat
egor
yB
Ra
nd
ing
Team
IDPr
imar
y Ev
iden
cet
ea
m in
te
RV
iew
at
tR
ad
e d
iSp
la
yTe
am N
ame
Seco
ndar
y Ev
iden
cet
ea
m e
nt
eR
pR
iSe
po
Rt
fo
lio
Scho
olC
rite
ria
7C
ompe
titi
on C
lass
Low
Dev
elop
ing
Adv
ance
dSc
ore
Cri
teri
a0
10
1 2
2 3
3 4
5 6
4 5
7 8
9 10
/5 /10
7.1
Team
Nam
e1 Irre
levan
t cho
iceLim
ited c
onsid
eratio
n of m
eanin
gWe
ll con
sidere
d, mea
ningfu
l team
name
appro
priate t
o goa
ls and
imag
e proje
ction
/5
7.2
Logo
Dev
elopm
ent¹
Limite
d ide
as &
deve
lopme
nt. N
o ori
ginal
work
evide
nt
Some
logo
idea
prog
ressio
n & cr
eativ
e log
o mod
ificati
on of
type
or gr
aphic
s no
ted
A num
ber o
f logo
idea
s con
sidere
d with
atten
tion t
o tea
m go
als an
d ide
ntity.
Crea
tive &
origi
nal lo
go
deve
lopme
nt cle
arly r
elates
to th
e tea
m’s c
hose
n nam
e, ide
ntity
and p
urpos
e/5
7.3
Fina
l Log
o De
sign¹
Team
logo
is ab
sent
or co
nfusin
gLo
go m
essa
ge is
simp
le an
d obv
ious
Stron
g tea
m log
o tha
t grab
s atte
ntion
, gen
erates
a po
sitive
resp
onse
, and
is ea
sily re
cogn
ised
and r
ecall
ed. W
ell co
nside
red us
e of c
olours
, type
and s
hape
s enh
ance
mea
ning.
In ke
eping
with
bra
nding
/5
7.4
Logo
App
licat
ion
Poor
quali
ty rep
roduc
tion,
limite
d tea
m log
o bad
ging
Most
items
are b
adge
d with
team
logo
. Te
am lo
go qu
ality
dimini
shed
whe
n en
large
d or re
duce
d acro
ss ap
plica
tions
.
Team
logo
scale
s well
to la
rge an
d sma
ll bad
ging a
pplica
tions
. All a
pplica
tions
are o
f high
quali
ty an
d ap
propri
ately
posit
ioned
for s
trong
impa
ct/5
7.5
Team
Bra
ndin
gBr
andin
g mes
sage
is w
eak w
ith
incon
sisten
t app
licatio
n acro
ss
the pr
oject
Effec
tive t
eam
brand
ing co
nsist
ently
ap
plied
acros
s proj
ect c
ompo
nents
Exce
llent
and h
ighly
effec
tive m
essa
ging o
f team
imag
e. Qu
ality
and c
onsis
tent b
randin
g of te
am
name
, logo
, typo
graph
y, & c
olours
appli
ed ac
ross a
ll proj
ect e
lemen
ts: po
rtfolio
, unif
orms,
car, d
isplay
, so
cial m
edia
and c
ollate
ral. Ic
on, ta
gline
or m
asco
t add
ed to
stren
gthen
bran
ding
/10
7.6
Medi
a Exp
osur
eLim
ited o
r ineff
ectiv
eSo
me de
velop
ment,
some
impa
ct, so
me
cons
iderat
ion of
audie
nce a
nd pl
atform
s
Clear,
deve
loped
, high
impa
ct me
dia st
rateg
y, inc
luding
socia
l med
ia. C
areful
cons
iderat
ion of
targe
t au
dienc
e and
suita
ble pl
atform
s. Ev
idenc
e of a
ttemp
t to w
ork w
ith m
edia
broad
caste
rs/pu
blish
ers
with s
ome d
ocum
ented
succ
ess
/5
7.7
Team
Spo
nsor
s & R
EA
Corp
orat
e Par
tner
s ROI
Little
or no
ROI
Spon
sorsh
ip ac
know
ledge
d. So
me lo
gos
includ
ed in
proje
ct co
llater
alCle
ar an
d app
ropria
te vis
ibility
of te
am sp
onso
rs an
d REA
Corp
orate
Partn
ers. Q
uality
repro
ducti
on of
ap
propri
ate sp
onso
r and
REA
Corp
orate
Partn
er log
os ac
ross a
ll proj
ect c
ollate
ral as
requ
ired
/10
7.8
Team
Uni
form
Ineffe
ctive
or in
cons
isten
t, sam
e or
simila
r to su
pport
ersBa
sic an
d con
sisten
t acro
ss th
e tea
m,
distin
ct fro
m su
pport
ersCr
eative
and c
onsid
ered u
se of
bran
ding a
nd ap
propri
ate sty
ling fo
r all m
embe
rs. Te
am m
embe
r nam
es an
d rol
es cle
arly id
entifie
d. Cle
arly d
istinc
t from
supp
orters
/5
7.9
Team
Pre
senc
eNo
t all p
resen
t / Po
or en
ergy
Gene
rally
enthu
siasti
cAll
team
mem
bers
are ap
propri
ately e
ngag
ing an
d enth
usias
tic ab
out th
eir wo
rk/5
7.10
Te
am K
nowl
edge
Limite
d eng
agem
ent
Some
mem
bers
know
ledge
able
Each
mem
ber is
high
ly kn
owled
geab
le in
their r
ole an
d also
broa
dly kn
owled
geab
le ab
out d
etails
of the
ir entr
y. Able
to de
fer to
othe
rs wit
h con
fiden
ce an
d sha
re pro
ject o
wners
hip/5
Bra
ndin
g G
RA
ND
TO
TAL
/60
1 Ju
dged
from
a tea
m’s E
nterp
rise P
ortfo
lio
Ap
pen
dic
es
|
Art
icle
C14
20
20
Lev
els
2, 3
& 4
Co
mp
etit
ion
Re
gu
lati
on
s5
6
C14
�19
Crit
eria
8 -
Mar
ketin
g: T
rade
Dis
play
Sco
re C
ard
(Lev
el 3
: Spa
tial D
esig
n C
lass
)
Judg
ing
Sub
Cat
egor
yTr
ade
Dis
play
Team
IDPr
imar
y Ev
iden
ceTr
ade
Dis
play
Team
Nam
eSe
cond
ary
Evid
ence
Team
Inte
rvie
w, E
nter
pris
e Po
rtfo
lio
& D
esig
n B
rief
Scho
olC
rite
ria
8C
ompe
titi
on C
lass
Low
Dev
elop
ing
Adv
ance
dSc
ore
Cri
teri
a0
1 2
0 1
2 3
3 4
5 6
4 5
6 7
8 9
7 8
9 10
10
11 1
213
14 1
5/1
0/1
5
8.1
Trad
e D
ispl
ay
Des
ign
Dev
elop
men
t
Sing
le or
basic
conc
epts
and l
imite
d de
velop
ment
show
n.
Multip
le co
ncep
ts wi
th lin
ks
to re
sear
ch. L
ogica
l des
ign
deve
lopme
nts ex
plaine
d.
Seve
ral in
spire
d ide
as fo
r diffe
rent b
ooth
featur
es/fu
nctio
ns. C
learly
justi
fied d
evelo
pmen
ts ba
sed
aroun
d res
earch
and T
rade D
isplay
comp
etitio
n req
uirem
ents.
3D C
AD us
ed to
desig
n and
org
anise
booth
elem
ents
effec
tively
to m
axim
ise us
e of s
pace
and p
rovide
and r
ealis
tic gr
aphic
al rep
resen
tation
of th
e fina
l disp
lay.
/15
8.2
Prod
uct
Dis
play
Little
cons
iderat
ion gi
ven t
o pres
entat
ion
of the
desig
n spa
ceSo
me at
tempt
to dis
play t
he de
sign
spac
e as a
key f
eatur
eEx
celle
nt de
sign m
ateria
ls an
d meth
ods u
sed t
o effe
ctive
ly dis
play t
he de
sign s
pace
and i
ts ke
y co
mpon
ents
to ma
ke it
a fea
ture o
f the d
isplay
/10
8.3
Info
rmat
ion
Des
ign
Limite
d or r
epea
t of fo
lioPr
oject
mess
age i
s exp
ande
d be
yond
folio
Clea
n, we
ll-org
anise
d lay
out o
f writt
en an
d gra
phica
l infor
matio
n with
shar
p pro
fessio
nal
appe
al. C
onclu
sive s
naps
hot o
f team
’s ke
y mes
sage
s. Un
clutte
red,
enga
ging,
and e
asy t
o rea
d. Co
nsist
ent b
rand
ing st
yle/1
0
8.4
Use
of I
CTs
Limite
d ICT
sIC
Ts us
ed to
enha
nce p
resen
tation
Exce
llent
integ
ration
of m
ultim
edia
techn
ologie
s and
inter
activ
e ICT
s to d
emon
strate
, eng
age a
nd in
form
/10
8.5
Visu
al D
esig
n &
Impa
ct
Limite
d or lo
w im
pact
creati
vity,
bran
ding,
mess
aging
and r
ecog
nition
of
spon
sors.
Some
relev
ant c
reativ
e mes
sagin
g ev
ident
with
cons
iderat
ion fo
r a ra
nge
of fac
tors
Crea
tive d
esign
whic
h is a
ttracti
ve an
d imp
actfu
l. Exc
ellen
t repre
senta
tion o
f the t
eam
name
, bran
d and
bra
nd co
lours.
Team
mes
sage
and/o
r slog
an is
clea
rly ev
ident
and s
pons
ors ar
e app
ropria
tely r
ecog
nised
. Inn
ovati
ve el
emen
ts ad
d inte
rest a
nd su
pport
team
mes
sagin
g./1
0
8.6
Stru
ctur
al
Des
ign1
No or
limite
d des
ign de
velop
ment
evide
nt, no
r con
sidera
tion f
or co
nstra
ining
facto
rs.
Some
good
evide
nce o
f des
ign
deve
lopme
nt an
d con
sider
ation
for
cons
traini
ng fa
ctors.
Crea
tive a
nd ju
stifie
d stru
ctural
desig
n with
exce
llent
use o
f spa
ce fo
r prim
ary di
splay
comp
onen
ts.
Evide
nce o
f des
ign de
velop
ment
cons
iderin
g fun
ction
ality
at ev
ents,
bran
ding a
nd te
am m
essa
ging,
mater
ials,
budg
et, su
staina
bility
, tran
sport
and a
ssem
bly co
nstra
ints.
/15
8.7
Mat
eria
ls
Sele
ctio
n &
U
se
No or
limite
d res
earch
into
mater
ials
with
cons
traini
ng fa
ctors
in mi
nd. S
ome
proble
ms ar
e evid
ent.
Gene
rally
effec
tive a
nd re
levan
t ch
oice o
f mate
rials
cons
iderin
g som
e fac
tors
High
ly eff
ectiv
e cho
ice of
mate
rials.
Evid
ence
of de
velop
ment
cons
iderin
g fac
tors i
nclud
ing ap
peara
nce,
budg
et, su
staina
bility,
trans
port a
nd as
semb
ly co
nstra
ints.
Team
unde
rstan
ds pr
opert
ies of
mate
rials
used
an
d is a
ble to
justi
fy the
ir cho
ices,
achie
ving a
n exc
ellen
t finis
h with
evide
nt att
entio
n to d
etail.
/15
8.8
Sust
aina
bilit
yNo
or lim
ited e
viden
ce of
susta
inabil
ity
factor
s tak
en in
to co
nside
ration
.So
me ev
idenc
e of s
ustai
nabil
ity
cons
iderat
ions b
y tea
m.St
rong d
emon
strate
d evid
ence
of te
am re
using
or re
cycli
ng pr
oject
comp
onen
ts wi
th co
nside
ration
for
the en
viron
ment
where
poss
ible.
/10
8.9
Pack
agin
g R
estr
ictio
ns2
Team
comp
lies w
ith AL
L pac
kagin
g res
trictio
ns as
per C
8.4 of
the A
ustra
lian C
ompe
tition
Reg
ulatio
ns (0
or 50
)/5
0
Trad
e B
ooth
GR
AN
D T
OTA
L –
Dev
elop
men
t Cla
ss/1
30Tr
ade
Boo
th G
RA
ND
TO
TAL
– Pr
ofes
sion
al C
lass
/145
1 Th
is cri
terion
NOT
appli
cable
to th
e Dev
elopm
ent C
lass a
t Stat
e Fina
ls2
This
criter
ion m
arke
d by t
he C
hair o
f Jud
ges p
rior t
o star
t of b
ooth
setup
& re
sults
enter
ed on
line.
Ap
pen
dic
es
|
Art
icle
C14
20
20
Lev
els
2, 3
& 4
Co
mp
etit
ion
Re
gu
lati
on
s5
7
C14
�20
Crit
eria
8 -
Mar
ketin
g: T
rade
Dis
play
Sco
re C
ard
(Lev
el 2
: RO
V &
Lev
el 4
: Sub
mar
ine
Cla
ss)
Judg
ing
Sub
Cat
egor
yt
Ra
de
diS
pl
ay
Team
IDPr
imar
y Ev
iden
cet
Ra
de
diS
pl
ay
Team
Nam
eSe
cond
ary
Evid
ence
te
am
int
eR
Vie
w, e
nt
eR
pR
iSe
po
Rt
fo
lio
& d
eS
ign
BR
ief
Scho
olC
rite
ria
8C
ompe
titi
on C
lass
Low
Dev
elop
ing
Adv
ance
dSc
ore
Cri
teri
a0
1 2
0 1
2 3
3 4
5 6
4 5
6 7
8 9
7 8
9 10
10 1
1 12
13
14 1
5/1
0/1
5
8.1
Trad
e D
ispl
ay
Des
ign
Dev
elop
men
t
Sing
le o
r bas
ic c
once
pts
and
limite
d de
velo
pmen
t sho
wn.
Mul
tiple
con
cept
s w
ith li
nks
to re
sear
ch. L
ogic
al d
esig
n de
velo
pmen
ts e
xpla
ined
.
Seve
ral i
nspi
red
idea
s fo
r diff
eren
t boo
th fe
atur
es/fu
nctio
ns. C
lear
ly ju
stifi
ed d
evel
opm
ents
ba
sed
arou
nd re
sear
ch a
nd T
rade
Dis
play
com
petit
ion
requ
irem
ents
. 3D
CAD
use
d to
des
ign
and
orga
nise
boo
th e
lem
ents
effe
ctiv
ely
to m
axim
ise
use
of s
pace
and
pro
vide
and
real
istic
gr
aphi
cal r
epre
sent
atio
n of
the
final
dis
play
./1
5
8.2
Wat
er C
raft
Dis
play
Littl
e co
nsid
erat
ion
give
n to
pr
esen
tatio
n of
the
wat
er c
raft
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
ke
y co
mpo
nent
s to
mak
e it
a fe
atur
e of
the
disp
lay
/5
8.3
Info
rmat
ion
Des
ign
Lim
ited
or re
peat
of f
olio
Proj
ect m
essa
ge is
exp
ande
d be
yond
folio
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 ap
peal
. C
oncl
usiv
e sn
apsh
ot o
f tea
m’s
key
mes
sage
s. U
nclu
ttere
d, e
ngag
ing,
and
eas
y to
read
. Con
sist
ent b
rand
ing
styl
e/1
0
8.4
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
ctive
ICTs
to d
emon
stra
te, e
ngag
e an
d in
form
/10
8.5
Visu
al D
esig
n &
Im
pact
Lim
ited
or lo
w im
pact
cre
ativ
ity,
bran
ding
, mes
sagi
ng a
nd
reco
gniti
on o
f spo
nsor
s.
Som
e re
leva
nt c
reat
ive m
essa
ging
ev
iden
t with
con
sider
atio
n fo
r a
rang
e of
fact
ors
Crea
tive
desig
n wh
ich is
attr
activ
e an
d im
pact
ful.
Exce
llent
repr
esen
tatio
n of
the
team
nam
e,
bran
d an
d br
and
colo
urs.
Tea
m m
essa
ge a
nd/o
r slo
gan
is cle
arly
evid
ent a
nd s
pons
ors
are
appr
opria
tely
reco
gnise
d. In
nova
tive
elem
ents
add
inte
rest
and
sup
port
team
mes
sagi
ng.
/10
8.6
Stru
ctur
al
Des
ign1
No
or li
mite
d de
sign
dev
elop
men
t ev
iden
t, 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 con
stra
inin
g fa
ctor
s.
Crea
tive
and
just
ified
stru
ctur
al d
esig
n wi
th e
xcel
lent
use
of s
pace
for p
rimar
y di
spla
y co
mpo
nent
s. E
viden
ce o
f des
ign
deve
lopm
ent c
onsid
erin
g fu
nctio
nality
at e
vent
s, b
rand
ing
and
team
mes
sagi
ng, m
ater
ials,
bud
get,
sust
aina
bility
, tra
nspo
rt an
d as
sem
bly
cons
train
ts.
/15
8.7
Mat
eria
ls
Sele
ctio
n &
Use
No o
r lim
ited
rese
arch
into
mat
eria
ls wi
th 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
ch
oice
of m
ater
ials
con
side
ring
som
e fa
ctor
s
High
ly eff
ectiv
e ch
oice
of m
ater
ials.
Evid
ence
of d
evel
opm
ent c
onsid
erin
g fa
ctor
s in
cludi
ng
appe
aran
ce, b
udge
t, su
stai
nabi
lity, t
rans
port
and
asse
mbl
y co
nstra
ints
. Tea
m u
nder
stan
ds
prop
ertie
s of
mat
eria
ls us
ed a
nd is
abl
e to
just
ify th
eir c
hoice
s, a
chie
ving
an e
xcel
lent
fini
sh w
ith
evid
ent a
ttent
ion
to d
etai
l./1
5
8.8
Sust
aina
bilit
yNo
or l
imite
d ev
iden
ce o
f sus
tain
abilit
y fa
ctor
s ta
ken
into
con
sider
atio
n.So
me
evid
ence
of s
usta
inab
ility
cons
ider
atio
ns b
y te
am.
Stro
ng d
emon
stra
ted
evid
ence
of t
eam
reus
ing
or re
cycl
ing
proj
ect c
ompo
nent
s w
ith
cons
ider
atio
n fo
r the
env
ironm
ent w
here
pos
sibl
e./1
08.
9 Pa
ckag
ing
Res
tric
tions
2 Te
am c
ompl
ies
with
ALL
pac
kagi
ng re
stric
tions
as
per C
8.4
of th
e Au
stra
lian
Com
petit
ion
Reg
ulat
ions
(0 o
r 50)
/50
Trad
e B
ooth
GR
AN
D T
OTA
L –
Dev
elop
men
t Cla
ss/1
30Tr
ade
Boo
th G
RA
ND
TO
TAL
– Pr
ofes
sion
al C
lass
/145
1 Th
is cri
terion
NOT
appli
cable
to th
e Dev
elopm
ent C
lass a
t Stat
e Fina
ls2
This
criter
ion m
arke
d by t
he C
hair o
f Jud
ges p
rior t
o star
t of b
ooth
setup
& re
sults
enter
ed on
line.
Ap
pen
dic
es
|
Art
icle
C14
20
20
Lev
els
2, 3
& 4
Co
mp
etit
ion
Re
gu
lati
on
s5
8
C14
�21
Crit
eria
9 -
Pres
enta
tion:
Tec
hniq
ue S
core
Car
d (A
ll C
lass
es)
Judg
ing
Sub
Cat
egor
yTe
chni
que
Team
IDPr
imar
y Ev
iden
ceTe
am P
rese
ntat
ion
Team
Nam
eSe
cond
ary
Evid
ence
Scho
olC
rite
ria
9C
ompe
titi
on C
lass
Low
Dev
elop
ing
Adv
ance
dSc
ore
Cri
teri
a0
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
/10
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
Pre
sent
atio
n Te
chni
que
GR
AN
D T
OTA
L/7
0
Ap
pen
dic
es
|
Art
icle
C14
20
20
Lev
els
2, 3
& 4
Co
mp
etit
ion
Re
gu
lati
on
s5
9
C14
�22
Crit
eria
10
- Pre
sent
atio
n: C
onte
nt S
core
Car
d (A
ll C
lass
es)
Judg
ing
Sub
Cat
egor
yc
on
te
nt
Team
IDPr
imar
y Ev
iden
cet
ea
m p
Re
Se
nt
at
ion
Team
Nam
eSe
cond
ary
Evid
ence
Scho
olC
rite
ria
10C
ompe
titi
on C
lass
Low
Dev
elop
ing
Adv
ance
dSc
ore
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 1
1 12
4 5
10
11 1
2 13
14
1513
14
15 1
6 17
18
19 2
0
/5 /15
/20
10.1
Te
am o
bjec
tives
Lim
ited
stat
emen
t of o
bjec
tives
Goo
d st
atem
ent o
f obj
ectiv
esEx
celle
nt s
tate
men
t of o
bjec
tives
sup
porte
d by
sou
nd
reas
onin
g/5
10.2
D
escr
iptio
n of
Wat
er
Cra
ft / D
esig
n Sp
ace1
Basi
c de
scrip
tion
of w
ater
cra
ft / d
esig
n sp
ace
only
Goo
d de
scrip
tion
of w
ater
cra
ft / d
esig
n sp
ace
com
pone
nts
and
feat
ures
Exce
llent
des
crip
tion
of w
ater
cra
ft / d
esig
n sp
ace
com
pone
nts
and
feat
ures
incl
udin
g de
sign
dec
isio
ns/5
10.3
In
nova
tion
Littl
e in
nova
tion
pres
ente
dIn
nova
tions
des
crib
ed a
nd ju
stifi
edO
rigin
ality
. Cle
ver i
nnov
atio
ns w
ith h
igh
posi
tive
proj
ect
impa
ct/1
510
.4
Refi
nem
ent
Littl
e re
finem
ent p
rese
nted
Refi
nem
ent d
escr
ibed
and
just
ified
Cle
ver r
efine
men
t with
hig
h po
sitiv
e pr
ojec
t im
pact
/15
10.5
C
olla
bora
tion
Littl
e co
llabo
ratio
n di
scus
sed
Link
s w
ith in
dust
ry o
r hig
her e
duca
tion
desc
ribed
Col
labo
ratio
ns ju
stifi
ed w
ith li
nks
to le
arni
ng a
nd p
roje
ct
outc
omes
/20
10.6
Le
arni
ng o
utco
mes
No
real
refle
ctio
ns d
iscu
ssed
Goo
d ex
plan
atio
n of
som
e le
arni
ng
outc
omes
A ra
nge
of p
erso
nal,
life-
long
lear
ning
and
car
eer s
kills
ac
quire
d an
d id
entifi
ed a
s pr
ojec
t out
com
es fo
r a ra
nge
of
team
mem
bers
/15
10.7
Fu
ture
Car
eer
Asp
iratio
ns &
R
esea
rch
Littl
e or
no
thou
ght h
ad
been
giv
en to
futu
re c
aree
r as
pira
tions
.
Evid
ence
of s
ome
team
mem
bers
re
sear
chin
g ca
reer
s ge
nera
lly b
ut n
o lin
kage
to o
ppor
tuni
ties
in D
efen
ce
Indu
strie
s
It is
evi
dent
that
team
mem
bers
had
thou
ghtfu
lly c
onsi
dere
d th
eir f
utur
e ca
reer
asp
iratio
ns a
nd u
nder
take
n re
sear
ch in
to
how
thes
e m
ight
be
linke
d w
ith o
ppor
tuni
ties
bein
g off
ered
in
Def
ence
Indu
strie
s/1
5
10.8
O
vera
ll cl
arity
Seve
ral c
once
pts
lack
ed
clar
ifica
tion
Cle
ar a
nd a
ppro
pria
te c
once
pt
expl
anat
ions
Ever
ythi
ng p
rese
nted
was
und
erst
ood
thro
ugh
exce
llent
ex
plan
atio
ns/5
Pre
sen
tati
on
Co
nte
nt
GR
AN
D T
OTA
L/9
5
1 De
sign S
pace
relev
ant to
Leve
l 3 S
patia
l Des
ign on
ly
Ap
pen
dic
es
|
Art
icle
C14
20
20
Lev
els
2, 3
& 4
Co
mp
etit
ion
Re
gu
lati
on
s6
0
C14
�23
Crit
eria
11
- Tria
ls: R
ov T
rial S
core
Car
d (L
evel
2: R
OV
Cla
ss)
Judg
ing
Sub
Cat
egor
yLe
vel
2: R
OV
Cla
ssTe
am ID
Prim
ary
Evid
ence
Tria
lsTe
am N
ame
Seco
ndar
y Ev
iden
ceSc
hool
Cri
teri
a11
Com
peti
tion
Cla
ss
Flot
atio
n an
d W
ater
Col
umn
Posi
tion
ing
Tria
l (4
min
Max
)C
rite
ria
(Tic
k B
oxes
)Po
ints
Floa
t on
surfa
ce a
nd h
old
posi
tion
/5
Sit o
n bo
ttom
and
hol
d po
sitio
n/5
Hov
er a
t mid
dep
th a
nd h
old
posi
tion
/5
Ret
urn
to s
urfa
ce a
nd h
old
posi
tion
/5
Flo
tatio
n &
Wat
er C
olum
n Po
sitio
ning
Tria
l Sub
-Tot
al/2
0
Subm
erge
d M
anoe
uvri
ng T
rial
(4m
in M
ax)
Cri
teri
a (T
ick
Box
es)
Poin
tsM
ove
ahea
d/5
Mov
e as
tern
/5
Turn
to p
ort
/5
Turn
to s
tarb
oard
/5
Sub
mer
ged
Man
oeur
vrin
g Tr
ial S
ub-T
otal
/20
Ret
riev
al V
oyag
e Tr
ial
(8m
in M
ax)
Cri
teri
a (T
ick
Box
es)
Poin
tsVi
sual
con
firm
atio
n
/50
Obj
ects
Obj
ect 1
Obj
ect 2
Obj
ect 3
/30
Butto
n ac
tivat
ion
/20
Tria
l Tim
e:R
etrie
val V
oyag
e R
anki
ng P
oint
s/6
0R
etrie
val V
oyag
e Su
b To
tal
/160
Mem
ber P
ilot P
enal
ties
-G
RAN
D T
OTA
L/2
00
Ap
pen
dic
es
|
Art
icle
C14
20
20
Lev
els
2, 3
& 4
Co
mp
etit
ion
Re
gu
lati
on
s6
1
C14
�24
Crit
eria
11
- Tria
ls: S
ubs
Tria
l Sco
re C
ard
(Lev
el 4
: Sub
mar
ine
Cla
ss)
Judg
ing
Sub
Cat
egor
yLe
vel
4: S
UB
S C
lass
Team
IDPr
imar
y Ev
iden
ceTr
ials
Team
Nam
eSe
cond
ary
Evid
ence
Scho
olC
rite
ria
11C
ompe
titi
on C
lass
Surf
ace
Man
oeuv
ring
Tri
al (4
min
Max
)C
rite
ria
(Tic
k B
oxes
)Po
ints
Mov
e ah
ead
/5
Mov
e as
tern
/5
Turn
to p
ort
/5
Turn
to s
tarb
oard
/5
Surfa
ce M
anoe
uvrin
g Tr
ial S
ub-T
otal
/20
Flot
atio
n an
d B
alla
stin
g Tr
ial
(4m
in M
ax)
Cri
teri
a (T
ick
Box
es)
Poin
tsFl
oat a
t lev
el tr
im a
nd m
inim
al h
eel i
ndefi
nite
ly/5
Balla
st to
mid
dep
th a
nd h
old
posi
tion
inde
finite
ly/5
Sit o
n bo
ttom
inde
finite
ly/5
Ret
urn
to s
urfa
ce w
ith le
vel t
rim a
nd m
inim
al h
eel
/5
Flot
atio
n an
d Ba
llast
ing
Tria
l Sub
-Tot
al/2
0
Subm
erge
d M
anou
vrin
g Tr
ial
(4m
in M
ax)
Cri
teri
a (T
ick
Box
es)
Poin
tsPo
rpoi
se (w
ith c
onst
ant s
low
ahe
ad s
peed
div
e, le
vel o
ut a
t mid
dep
th,
resu
rface
) - a
im to
dem
onst
rate
hyd
ropl
anes
./1
0
At m
id d
epth
, mov
e As
tern
/10
At m
id d
epth
, tur
n to
por
t/1
0
At m
id d
epth
, tur
n to
sta
rboa
rd/1
0
Subm
erge
d M
anoe
uvrin
g Tr
ial S
ub-T
otal
/40
Ap
pen
dic
es
|
Art
icle
C14
20
20
Lev
els
2, 3
& 4
Co
mp
etit
ion
Re
gu
lati
on
s6
2
Judg
ing
Sub
Cat
egor
yLe
vel
4: S
UB
S C
lass
Team
IDPr
imar
y Ev
iden
ceTr
ials
Team
Nam
eSe
cond
ary
Evid
ence
Scho
olC
rite
ria
11C
ompe
titi
on C
lass
Tim
ed W
ay P
oint
Voy
age
Tria
l (6
min
Max
)C
rite
ria
(Tic
k B
oxes
)Po
ints
Gat
e 1
Wat
er c
raft
entir
ely
subm
erge
d, p
asse
s th
roug
h ga
te u
prig
hts,
doe
s no
t m
ake
cont
act
/10
Gat
e 2
Wat
er c
raft
entir
ely
subm
erge
d, p
asse
s th
roug
h ga
te u
prig
hts,
doe
s no
t m
ake
cont
act
/10
Gat
e 3
Wat
er c
raft
entir
ely
subm
erge
d, p
asse
s th
roug
h ga
te u
prig
hts,
doe
s no
t m
ake
cont
act
/10
Gat
e 4
Wat
er c
raft
entir
ely
subm
erge
d, p
asse
s th
roug
h ga
te u
prig
hts,
doe
s no
t m
ake
cont
act
/10
Gat
e 5
Wat
er c
raft
entir
ely
subm
erge
d, p
asse
s th
roug
h ga
te u
prig
hts,
doe
s no
t m
ake
cont
act
/10
Gat
e 6
Wat
er c
raft
entir
ely
subm
erge
d, p
asse
s th
roug
h ga
te u
prig
hts,
doe
s no
t m
ake
cont
act
/10
Doc
king
- D
epar
ture
and
Arri
val
Wat
er c
raft
is fu
lly c
onta
ined
and
is s
tatio
nary
with
in d
ock
/10
Tria
l Tim
e:Ti
med
Way
Poi
nt V
oyag
e R
anki
ng P
oint
s/5
0Ti
med
Way
Poi
nt V
oyag
e Su
b To
tal
/120
Mem
ber P
ilot P
enal
ties
-G
RAN
D T
OTA
L/2
00
Ap
pen
dic
es
|
Art
icle
C14
20
20
Lev
els
2, 3
& 4
Co
mp
etit
ion
Re
gu
lati
on
s6
3
2018 Levels 2, 3 & 4 Competition Regulations 64
1300 204 478 www.rea.org.au