Planning & Execution
Information that relates to planning and execution of the ME Lab Hardware project.
Customer NeedsProject Constraints
The constraints are mainly factors outlined in the Project Readiness Package, but have been adjusted to better meet our customer's needs.
Customer Needs listed in the Project Readiness Package that the ME Lab Hardware Team will adhere to.
Specifications listed in the Project Readiness Package that the ME Lab Hardware Team will adhere to.
House of Quality
House of Quality supplied in the Project Readiness Package. This relates Customer Needs to Specifications on a 1, 3, 9 scale- 1 having the least importance and 9 having the most.
Team Norms & ValuesCode of Ethics
This is how our team is expected to act and perform.
Project OverviewOne Page Project Summary
An overview of our project including:
- Project Background
- Problem Statement
- Expected Project Benefits
- Assumptions & Constraints
- Issues & Risks
Project Plans & Schedules
Notes From Meetings With Customers
Meeting with Dr. Hensel - 12/2/2011
- MECHE102 folder in EDGE has documents uploaded by Dr.
Hensel, which are relevant to the course the equipment is
being made for.
- Syllabus: day by day, includes previous lecture, during/post lab analysis requirements, weekly list of experiments
- Goal of Engineering Mechanics: to reinforce concepts of Newtonian Physics & Calculus they currently learn in class (ex. Week 2 – derivatives and limits)
- All labs are conducted in groups of four
- Each individual has specific duties (need to account for in lab procedure)
- Procedure must be doable if a member is absent
- Have to be designed such that it could be performed by 1 person only
- Make-up sessions for labs available once a week
- Experimental design must be as intuitive as possible
- By mid-MSD1, need to finalize standard lab format. Preferable to use ANSI published format
- Experiment #2 – 1 dimension, linear, gravity, object dropped, voltage collected vs. time collected.
- Ideas for Curvilinear experiment:
- 1 plane (x,y)
- 1 component w/gravity
- Doesn’t have to be a roller coaster but requires same concepts
- Need to take into account lecture topics
- Video Logging: Our part only includes selecting and
implementing the video logging equipment
- Can be purchased instead of designing
- All data collection should not be automated
- Sensors – Prof Wellin has studied sensors for six months; already determined that infrared sensors are better than ultrasound for this application
- Labview might not be the final software package to use. We can use it for now but our work will be replicated in the final package later on
- The team interview freshmen and conduct empathy exercise
- Experiment has to have reliable data (tradeoff: complexity vs. easy to understand)
- Prototype – would be beneficial if we
documented videos to communicate how to conduct
- Videos will be used during orientation for the course
- Budget: liberal, currently forecasted
- $20,000 annually on lab for maintenance
- $40,000 every 5 years to replace computers
- Team can use solidworks or ProE to build models; need 2D and 3D
Meeting with Dr. Hensel - 12/16/2011
- The faculty that will teach the course will be John Wellin, Tim Landschoot, Risa Robinson, and Edward Hensel.
- The location for the laboratory will be in the
current Measurement, Instruments, and Controls
- Tables, chairs, and computers will be provided in the laboratory.
- The team can change the current constraints, but with
- Do not over constrain.
- A robust structure is very important.
- Invest in quality and durable products.
- Expected sampling rate is general for all
- Each experiment will vary based on type of DAQ.
- John Wellin currently has an IR sensor which will likely be what is used in experiments.
Meeting with Dr. Kolodziej- 1/9/2012
- Plastic bearings should work well and are relatively cheap.
- Example pendulum uses an encoder by US digital
- Should be durable enough for our purposes.
- Formatting the data to work in LabView may be problematic
- Encoder mounting must be solid.
- Extruded 8020 aluminum bar was used for their frame - 8020.net.
- The heavier the mass is, the less impact friction from the bearings will have on the system.
- He advised us not to “reinvent the wheel” for most of these experiments, there are many examples of companies who make similar products (Pasco).
Meeting with Professor Wellin- 1/9/2012
- Ultrasonic are limited by the speed of sound.
- Ultrasonic have interference problems.
- Analog Out - interface with LabView.
- Sampling rate approx 20/sec.
- Doesn’t give us a lot of data points to work with.
- Mr. Wellin has drawings for us if we want/need them.
- Make sure there is a consistent way that materials are handled and stored.
- Slow sampling rate may be a problem. Might be able to still use these sensors but the data will have to be handled differently.
Important Takeaways for Students From Lab Experiments:
- Be comfortable with sensors, software, etc.
- Make the knowledge gained in the class something that “sticks”.
- Don’t try to reinvent the wheel, look at what other companies have (Ex. Vernier and Pasco).
- The department might look at using Signal Express
instead of LabVIEW.
- Possibly a free download.
- Want to do this because there isn’t time to teach LabVIEW since the labs start in week 1.
Meeting with Professor Landschoot - 1/12/2012
- Apparatus must be easy to set up at the beginning of class and tear down to stow away at the end of class. Figure out required setup and tear down time within the 90 minutes total class period.
- Test out a spring for harmonic oscillation to see if sufficient data can be collected with current IR sensor.
- Push pull mechanism that snaps into place for attachment of different setups to a common stand. The stand could be a vertical bar with pin holes or slots for height adjustment locations.
- For the roller coaster experiment, Landschoot suggested that we design an experiment that compares a frictionless setup and one with friction. This way, students can see the energy loss associated with friction.
Meeting with Professor Robinson - 1/13/2012Comments on the proposed apparatus concept design that can accommodate all experiments:
- May take less physical space in lab once set up.
- May take less storage space.
- In case a student is behind and the professor would like the student to make up a lab supposed to be performed in week 2 during week 3 while rest of students are working on lab for week 3, it will not be possible.
- Who will be setting up and tearing down all the time?
Will you be able to accommodate setup/tear down, time to perform experiment and time to analyze data within the given lab time frame? Additional Comments
- No preference to a particular software that the students are required to learn, therefore any software can be used for the data collection interface.
- Capability on collecting unique data sets are of high priority.
- Sensor – Professor Wellin is in charge, will need to get all feedback/decisions from him.
- Creating a design for the MECHLAB is all up to our
- Determining storage space requirements.
- Storage space within the design layout.
- Number of computers needed.
- Organization/Layout (includes 5S).
- Preferred to have a flexible layout design, modularity is priority. So that in case there is a need to add additional functions/additional course labs to be conducted in MECHLAB, it will be possible to incorporate more easily.
- As of now, we should create our design keeping in mind that only Engineering
Mechanics labs will be conducted there. However, it is likely that additional functions may need to be added. In that case, our design and recommendations will be passed on to a separate group later to improve upon/incorporate additional functions etc.
- Each group to conduct lab may have 3-4 students (to take into account when designating physical space requirements for each apparatus).
- Each student will need a computer to use for him/her self. Need to account for table space to accommodate all students using the computers simultaneously.
Meeting with Dr. Hensel - 2/1/2012
- How many spare parts would be necessary?
- If it is a low cost part that is prone to breaking, will need to stock more. 1 spare minimum needs to be on stock for every part no matter what the costs are an ‘extra’ apparatus should be available for experimentation in case any parts are defective that deem it not usable.
- Encoders/sensors will eventually break and we should design apparatus such that a sensor with more updated technology in the future can easily be replaced.
- Is LoggerPro software available currently campus wide
or only for a specific department/college?
- not available campus wide but we will be able to use it for the proto-type. We will need to tell the company that we are testing it with prototype and if determined to be feasible, will roll out campus wide/college-wide
- What is the name of the company willing to provide
scrap material? Any contacts available?
- We should go ahead and purchase parts. Dr. Hensel had suggested this originally in the case that we have parts in the experiment that the student might use and dispose of
- What would be a standard sized table?
- Base the layout of the lab on the tables currently available in the room. A senior design project will be conducted next year with a heavy emphasis on human factors and layout design principles. If we could provide couple different options of the lab layout along with the prototype, that can be passed on to the team working on it next. Narrowest is 24”, Widest is 36”, most common is 30” in 1direction
- Need to confirm - can the computer be placed on the same table as the apparatus?
- Need to confirm - can the data for all team members
be collected using the same computer?
- Additional ideas
- (monitor) screens located near each team along wall so that anything that is on the student’s personal computer (experiment results) or anything the professor is demonstrating on computer can be shown on all screens. This way, students wouldn’t find it difficult to follow the teacher. Also if any interesting results from any of the teams need to be shared, the professor could potentially bring up the team’s screen to be shared on all the monitors so everyone can take a look at them as well.
Meeting with Dr. Hensel - 2/13/2012
- Data will be in form of time vs number of tick marks
- alpha = 0
- Velocity tangential = r x omega
- Plots from data
- theta vs time
- omega vs time
- alpha vs time
- Vt vs time
- Vr vs time
- Vx vs time
- x vs t x=rcos(theta)
- y vs t y=rsin(theta)
- Vy vs t
- Good gear range is 30 to 600 rpm. Use gearing to establish rotational speed.
Peer ReviewsPeer Review Form
This is the form to be used in review of peers on the design team.
Home | Systems Design | Detailed Design | Build, Test, Document | Project Review