P15550: Customized Personal Protection Headwear

Project Planning

Table of Contents

Project Definition Review

The Project Definition Review presentation can be found here: Project Definition Review

Some initial feedback of our first benchmarking presentation:

1. Include a picture of a football helmet with foam circled in the helmet on the title slide of power point. This is to show the audience that our project is strictly focused on the foam insert and not creating the actual helmet.

2. How do we compensate for the hair on someone's head while conducting the head scanning process on the athlete?

3. What is the resolution of the head scanner? Will this be a concern for us?

Project Manager & Team Roles

Chris Casella: Project Leader

Scott Quenville: Mechanical Engineer

Tiffany Gundler: Biomedical Engineer

Nathan Marshall: Mechanical Engineer

Kayla Wheeler: Biomedical Engineer

Christian Blank: Mechanical Engineer

Code of Ethics & Team Norms

The Code of Ethics for the team can be found here: Code of Ethics

Project Plan

The current project plan can be found here: Project Plan

Risk Management

Some of the risks and concerns that we have for the project include:

-Will thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU) really be the best option for preventing concussions impacts?

-Cell wall stiffness will affect density calculations and segment size.

-Time requirement to scan, import, and print must be short to make idea practical.

-Will the testing and design phase require more material than expected?

-How will 3-D printed foam help reduce concussions from rotational impacts?

Peer Assessment

Using the +/delta system, we conducted our first peer review on 9/23/2014. We have taken feedback from our peers and used this to improve our future function as a team.

We conducted our second peer review on 10/07/2014 after our Systems Design Review presentation. We have used feedback on our presentation and work that we have done to make changes to improve our project. We used the +/ delta system again to reinforce good qualities and qualities that we should improve upon individually.

Our third peer review was performed on 10/30/2014 after our week 9 review presentation. We went over roles again and re established who will be working on what aspects of the project.