Laboratory Portfolio
A portfolio built from both virtual instruments plus two supplied-dataset analyses, demonstrating fitting, interpretation and honest provenance.
Due: 14 May 2027 · Weight: 25%
The brief#
Build a four-part portfolio: fit and justify a model in the Virtual Rheometer, read a stability margin from the Crispness Phase Diagram, and analyse two supplied datasets using methods from earlier modules.
The two instrument tasks ask you to use the Virtual Rheometer and the Crispness Phase Diagram instrument directly and report what you found, not to describe the instruments in the abstract. The two dataset tasks give you tabulated data (one mechanical, one thermal or moisture-related) with no instrument attached, so you practise the same fitting and interpretation discipline — Module 10’s residual-plot habit in particular — without a guided interface.
What you submit#
A single PDF portfolio in four clearly labelled sections, one per task above, each stating which model was applied, why, and what its residuals or stability margin show. Screenshots or exported figures from the two instruments are required, not optional, since they are the evidence that the instrument task was actually attempted rather than reasoned about from the module pages alone.
The spec
The brief poses the problem and leaves room for a response. The spec is the fixed part: what a marker checks. Some lines can be checked mechanically; the rest call for judgement.
- submitted by the deadline as a single PDF portfolio with four labelled sections
- includes at least one screenshot or exported figure from each of the two instruments
- both supplied datasets are analysed with a stated method, not eyeballed
How it is marked
| Criterion | Weight |
|---|---|
| Virtual Rheometer task — model choice, fit quality, residuals | 30% |
| Crispness Phase Diagram task — state interpretation, stability margin | 30% |
| Two supplied-dataset analyses | 25% |
| Assumptions and data provenance stated throughout | 15% |