Home / Courses / Engineering Graphics and CAD / Lesson 35

Engineering Graphics and CAD · Lesson 35 of 35

Final integrated project

Integrate the whole course into one original mechanism/product, from concept to reviewed, revised, manufacturable package.

Readiness check

Learning objectives

By the end of this project you can:

Decompose a product into functional parts and interfaces.
Build robust parametric parts and an assembly with correct mates.
Verify degrees of freedom, interference, and clearances.
Produce complete part and assembly drawings with dimensions, tolerances, fits, an exploded view, and a bill of materials.
Execute and document an engineering change and reflect on it.

Check your starting point

Five to ten minutes. Confirm you can, from memory or notes:

Fully constrain a sketch and build a robust feature tree (L20, L23).
Assemble parts with mates and check degrees of freedom and interference (L25, L26).
Produce a complete, standards-aware drawing from a model (L28) and review it (L34).

Interpretation. If any of these is shaky, revisit that lesson before starting; the project uses all of them together. The project is where the whole course comes together, so a brief refresher now saves time later.

You need every prior lesson (L1-L34).

0 or 1 weak itemsContinue with this lesson.

2 weak itemsReview the learning objectives above, then return.

3 or more weak itemsWork through the prerequisite examples before continuing.

The core idea

What it is. The final project is a complete, original mechanical product or mechanism with two to five original parts, taken from concept through modelling, assembly, drawings, review, a documented engineering change, and reflection. It is the integrated demonstration of the whole course.

Why an engineer needs it. Real engineering is not a single skill but the whole workflow applied to an original problem: understand the function, decompose it, model robustly, assemble, document, review, change, and reflect. The project proves you can do this end to end, which is what the downstream design and manufacturing courses, and real practice, require.

What problem it solves. It integrates every course skill into one defensible design package that another engineer could review, build, and change.

What goes wrong when treated as only modelling. A project judged solely on a nice model misses the point: definition, drawings, review, change management, and reflection carry equal weight. A single "perfect" version without a documented change also misses the required demonstration of controlled change.

The workflow (each step uses named lessons):

Concept and functional decomposition: sketch the mechanism, break it into functional parts, identify interfaces (L1-L4, L24, L33).
Parametric part modelling: build each part robustly, with design intent (L18-L23).
Assembly: mate the parts, matching real joints (L24-L25).
Verification: check degrees of freedom, interference, and clearances against fits (L26, L14).
Documentation: part drawings and an assembly drawing with dimensions, tolerances, fits, exploded view, and BOM (L11-L17, L27-L28).
Review: review the package across the four domains (L34).
Engineering change: execute and document a change, with traceability (L29).
Reflection: explain what changed and why.

The full brief, project options, deliverables, rubric, and submission checklist are in Phase 5. This lesson gives the reference example and the milestones.

Part 6: Manufacturability and engineering judgement.

Check: explain the decision in your own words before using a CAD command.

The lesson map. Final integrated project becomes manageable when you move through the four checks in order and verify each result before continuing.

The skills, taught in order

Skill 35.1 - Decompose the product

Concept. Break the product into functional parts and interfaces. Terminology. Functional decomposition, interface. Procedure. Sketch the mechanism, list its functions, assign each to a part, and identify the interfaces where parts meet. Reasoning. A clear decomposition guides robust modelling and assembly. Failure mode. Modelling before understanding the function and interfaces. Check. For your chosen product, list its parts and interfaces.

Skill 35.2 - Model and assemble robustly

Concept. Build robust parts and a correct assembly. Terminology. Robust model, mate, design intent. Procedure. Model each part with fully constrained sketches and a robust tree; assemble with mates that match the joints. Reasoning. Robust parts and correct mates make the assembly editable and correct. Failure mode. Fragile parts or wrong mates. Check. Confirm each part survives a representative edit and the assembly moves correctly.

Skill 35.3 - Verify and document

Concept. Verify motion and fit, then produce complete documentation. Terminology. DOF, interference, working drawing, BOM. Procedure. Check DOF, interference, and clearances; produce part and assembly drawings, an exploded view, and a BOM. Reasoning. Verification and documentation make the design buildable and inspectable. Failure mode. Skipping verification or leaving documentation incomplete. Check. Run the L17 completeness check on your drawings.

Skill 35.4 - Change and reflect

Concept. Execute a documented engineering change and reflect on it. Terminology. Engineering change, revision, reflection. Procedure. Make a design change on a branch, document it (ECR, revision), and reflect on what changed and why. Reasoning. Controlled change and reflection are core engineering practice. Failure mode. No change, or an undocumented one. Check. Record your change as a revision with a reason.

Worked example 1: a reference mini-project (adjustable shaft support)

Problem. As a model of the expected standard, walk through a small two-part reference project: an adjustable shaft support (a base and a slider that adjusts the shaft height, held by a screw). This shows the full workflow at the standard your project should meet.

Solution walkthrough.

Concept and decomposition. The function is to support a shaft at an adjustable height. Two functional parts: a base (fixed, with a vertical slot) and a slider (carries the shaft bore, moves in the slot, clamped by a screw). Interfaces: the slot-and-slider sliding fit, the shaft bore, and the clamp screw.
Modelling. Model the base robustly (slot from stable references, L23) and the slider (shaft bore and slot-engaging feature). Share the slot width as a variable used by both (L24).
Assembly. Insert both, ground the base, and mate the slider to the slot with a slider mate (one translational DOF, L25), plus the clamp screw.
Verification. Confirm the slider retains one translational DOF (L26); run an interference check (the sliding fit is a clearance fit, L14; the clamp screw is a threaded engagement); verify the slot-slider clearance matches the intended fit.
Documentation. Produce a working drawing of each part (dimensions, the slot and bore fits, finishes, L11-L17, L28), an assembly drawing, an exploded view, and a BOM (L27).
Review. Review the package across the four domains (L34): model health, drawing completeness, manufacturability, traceability.
Engineering change. Suppose testing shows the slider racks (tilts) in the slot; the change is to widen the slider's slot engagement for a better guide. Do it on a branch, document it (ECR reason: prevent racking; revision B), and release (L29).
Reflection. Explain what changed (wider guide) and why (racking), and what it improved.

Result. A complete two-part reference package: decomposed, robustly modelled, assembled and verified, fully documented, reviewed, changed with traceability, and reflected upon. This is the standard your project should meet.

Why it works. Each step applies a named skill, and together they form a defensible, buildable, changeable design package.

How to verify independently. Check the reference against the four review domains (L34): it should pass model health, completeness, manufacturability, and traceability. Meeting all four is the target for your own project.

Worked example 2: a design change propagating through the package

Problem. Show how one design change propagates through the whole package, so you know what to update when you make your project's change. Take the reference project's change (widen the slider guide) and trace it through model, assembly, drawings, and BOM. The complication is keeping the entire package consistent through a change.

Solution.

Model. Widening the slider's guide is a parameter/feature edit on the slider part (on a branch). Because the model is robust, the edit updates cleanly.
Assembly. The slider still mates to the slot; if the slot width also changes, the shared variable (L24) updates both parts, keeping the fit correct. Re-check DOF and interference after the change (L26).
Drawings. The slider's working drawing is associative (L28), so its views and driven dimensions update automatically; confirm the changed dimensions and re-run the completeness check (L17). Record the revision (L29).
BOM and exploded view. If no part is added or removed, the BOM count is unchanged; if a part changed identity (new part number for the revised slider), update it. The exploded view updates with the model.
Traceability. The branch, the revision-block note, and the ECR reason document the whole change.
Consistency check. After the change, verify the model, assembly, drawings, and BOM all reflect the new design and agree with each other.

Comparison. A change touched every deliverable; a robust, associative package propagates it largely automatically, while a fragile or manually-linked package would need error-prone hand updates. This is why the course stressed robustness and associativity throughout.

Result. The guide-widening change propagates through the model (edit), assembly (re-verified), drawings (associative update plus revision), and BOM (updated if identity changed), all kept consistent and traceable.

Independent check. After your own change, confirm every deliverable (model, assembly, drawings, BOM) reflects it and they agree. Full consistency confirms the change was propagated correctly.

Misconceptions and diagnostics

Misconception	Why it seems reasonable	Why it is wrong	Evidence that reveals it	Correction	Diagnostic question
"The project is mostly modelling."	The model is the visible output.	Definition, drawings, verification, review, change, and reflection carry equal weight.	A great model with no drawings or change fails the brief.	Complete every deliverable, not just the model.	"Have I done drawings, review, change, and reflection?"
"One perfect version is the goal."	Perfection sounds ideal.	The brief requires demonstrating a controlled change.	No documented change is present.	Execute and document an engineering change.	"Where is my documented change and reflection?"
"A change only affects the model."	You edited the model.	A change propagates to assembly, drawings, and BOM.	The drawing or BOM disagrees with the model.	Update and re-check every deliverable.	"Do the drawings and BOM reflect the change?"

Practice ladder

Level A - Project planning

Task. Choose a project option and produce a planning checklist: function, parts, interfaces, and a modelling strategy. Deliverable. A one-page project plan. Success criteria. Clear function, sensible part count (2-5), identified interfaces, a modelling strategy. Common errors. Over-scoping (too many parts) or no interface plan. Difficulty. Low to medium.

Level B - Milestone 1: concept and decomposition

Task. Produce concept sketches, a functional decomposition, and interface identification (with feedback). Deliverable. Sketches plus a decomposition-and-interface document. Success criteria. Functions assigned to parts; interfaces identified; concept feasible. Common errors. Missing an interface. Difficulty. Medium.

Level C - Milestone 2: parts, assembly, and checks

Task. Model the parts robustly, assemble them, and verify DOF, interference, and clearances (independently). Deliverable. The parts, the assembly, and a verification report. Success criteria. Robust parts; correct mates and motion; verification passed. Common errors. Fragile parts or wrong mates. Difficulty. Medium to high.

Level D - Final submission

Task. Produce the full package: drawings (part and assembly, with dimensions, tolerances, fits), exploded view, BOM, a review across the four domains, a documented engineering change, and a reflection. Deliverable. The complete design package (see the Phase 5 submission checklist). Success criteria. Every deliverable present, consistent, standards-aware, reviewed, and traceable; the change is documented and reflected upon. Common errors. Incomplete drawings; no documented change; deliverables that disagree. Difficulty. High. (This is the graded final project; the rubric is in Phase 5.)

Working with AI, and proving it yourself

Use AI as a tutor

Useful AI support:

Ask it to help brainstorm project options at the right scope (then you choose and verify feasibility).
Ask it to review your project plan for missing interfaces or over-scoping.
Ask it to suggest a change to test (then you implement and document it).

Limits:

A text assistant cannot model, assemble, or verify your design; it cannot see your package.
It may propose an over-scoped or infeasible product.

Verify AI output against: the four review domains (L34), your own DOF and interference checks (L26), and the completeness check (L17). Everything AI suggests, you must model, verify, and document yourself.

Prove it yourself

A plausible but incorrect AI answer, and how to catch it. You ask, "Can I submit just the CAD model and skip the drawings and the engineering change?" and the assistant replies: "Yes, a good model is enough to demonstrate the skills."

This misreads the brief. Detect it with the project requirements: the brief requires drawings, verification, review, a documented change, and reflection, all carrying weight, not just a model. The evidence is the deliverable list and rubric (Phase 5). Correct conclusion: complete every required deliverable; the model is one part of an integrated package.

Retrieval and spaced review

What are the eight steps of the project workflow?
Why is the project more than modelling?
How do you verify an assembly moves and fits correctly?
What documents make up the final package?
Why is a documented engineering change required?
How does a change propagate through the package?
Cumulative (whole course): Name one skill from each part (I-VI) that the project uses.
Reconstruction task: From memory, outline the reference mini-project from concept to reflection.

Answers. 1: concept/decomposition, part modelling, assembly, verification, documentation, review, engineering change, reflection. 2: definition, drawings, verification, review, change, and reflection all carry weight. 3: check DOF, run an interference check, and verify clearances against the fits. 4: part drawings, an assembly drawing, an exploded view, and a BOM (plus the models and review). 5: to demonstrate controlled, traceable change, a core engineering practice. 6: through the model, assembly, drawings, and BOM, kept consistent and traceable. 7: for example projection (I), sections (II), fits (III), robust modelling (IV), assemblies (V), manufacturability (VI).

Suggested review intervals. Use the whole-course retrieval set for spaced review after the project: 1 week, 1 month, 3 months.

Reference mapping and next step

Read further

all references
project options and rubric in Phase 5.

Standards details must be checked against the current official edition used by your institution or employer.

Finish the lesson

You can now: take an original mechanical product from concept through robust modelling, assembly, verification, complete documentation, engineering review, controlled change, and reflection, applying every skill in the course.

Course self-assessment checklist.

I can visualize and project geometry (Parts I-II).
I can dimension, tolerance, and read a complete drawing (Part III).
I can build robust parametric models with design intent (Part IV).
I can assemble, verify, document, and revise (Part V).
I can judge and improve manufacturability and review a package (Part VI).
I can complete an integrated design package and defend my decisions.

Where this leads: you are prepared for Manufacturing Processes and Machine Elements and Mechanical Design (both of which list this course as a prerequisite), and for later CAE, product development, and advanced CAD. The transferable principles (communication, robust modelling, design intent, manufacturability, review) carry to any CAD software you use next.

Required submission: the complete final project package (Phase 5 submission checklist). Optional extension: present your project in a short design review to peers, defending your modelling, tolerancing, and manufacturability decisions.

End of Part VI and of all lesson content (L1-L35). Phase 5 (the assessment system, the seven-project sequence, rubrics, the final-project brief, and the downloadable resource set) and Phase 6 (the quality-assurance audit) follow.