P17301: LORD Downhole Test Simulator
/public/

Problem Definition

Table of Contents

Project Summary

LORD Corporation designs and manufactures multiple vibration isolators and shock dampers for use in downhole fracking drills. Currently, LORD is sending their product to the customer to undergo necessary testing. Ideally, LORD would like to have more control over the testing process by bringing the testing in-house. This means easy access to an onsite testing apparatus which will provide the necessary drilling simulation equipment. The testing facility will include hardware to expose the components to various environments representative of downhole conditions. This will give LORD a competitive advantage by allowing them to sell validated and pre-tested parts.

LORD is looking for a recommendation for a test facility design. This feasibility study will include a thorough cost analysis and 3D models. The cost analysis is to include the cost of parts along with the cost of utilities needed to run the simulator. The test simulator will be developed for a wide range of users at an in-house facility. The limitations and constraints for the test stand will be determined and reported during the project.

Link to project readiness package: PRP

Link to one page project overview: Project Summary

Phase 1 Review Meeting Objective

Customer Interviews

Date Interviewee Role Questions Meeting Notes
Aug 29, 2016 Kieth Ptak, Mike Brown Primary Customer, LORD Project Engineer Questions Meeting Notes
Sep 13, 2016 Kieth Ptak Primary Customer --- Meeting Notes
Sep 14, 2016 Kieth Ptak, Dave DiGello, Cortland Chapman Primary Customer, LORD Tool Designer, LORD Test Engineer --- Meeting Notes

Important Stakeholders

Stakeholder Representative Role
LORD Keith Ptak & Zach Fuhrer Primary Customer
RIT Gary Werth (Guide) MSD Sponsor
Design Engineer Mike Brown Interest Group
Test Engineer Cortland Chapman End User
Lab Technician End User
Marketing Adam Keithly Interest Group
Business Development Interest Group

Use Cases

New Product Introduction
Use case for development of new product
Recreate External Product Failure
Use case for recreating failure of product in field
Creation of Test Procedure
Use case for creating test procedure

Project Goals and Key Deliverables

Customer Requirements (Needs)

Customer Requirements

Customer Requirements

Link to the live document here

Engineering Requirements (Metrics & Specifications)

Engineering Requirements

Engineering Requirements

House of Quality

House of Quality

House of Quality

Benchmarking

We will be benchmarking various sources against their completion of our engineering requirements. The preliminary list of sources is as follows:

Risk Management

Risk Management Overview

Risk Management Overview

Likelihood and Severity are ranked on a 1, 3 or 9 scale with 1 being low and 9 being high.

A link to the most up-to-date risk management spreadsheet can be found here.

Project Plan

Phase 1

Phase 1

Phase 2

Phase 2

Subsystem Plan for Phase 2

Subsystem Plan for Phase 2

Individual 3 week plans:

Sam Zimmerman

Daniel Bowers

Abby Tremont

Nicholas Fewell

Hyungsuk Kang

Jason Whyte

Matt Biron

Team Values and Norms

The following values are agreed upon as appropriate team behaviors for each of our members.

Punctual

Each team member will be prompt and arrive at the team meetings on time. If an unexpected conflict comes up, the absent team member will notify at least one team-mate prior to the expected absence. An absent team-member should confirm that a team-mate has received their message (in person, voice mail, email, etc).

Thorough

Each team member will complete their tasks thoroughly and completely, so that the work does not have to be re-done by a peer on the team. If a member does not know how to complete a task, feels overwhelmed, or needs assistance then the member notifies peers, and seeks assistance either from a peer, the faculty guide, a faculty consultant, or another person.

Accurate

Each team member completes their work accurately and in a way that can be easily checked for accuracy by peers and the faculty guide. All work is fully documented and easy to follow.

Professional and Ethical

Each team member gives credit where credit is due. All work completed includes citations to appropriate literature, or sources of assistance. If a team member has gotten assistance from a publication or individual, then that assistance or guidance is fully documented in the reports prepared. Each team member is honest and trustworthy in their dealings with their peers.

Committed

Each team member will contribute an equal share to the success of the project.

Standards

Each team member must follow all team standards, listed here:

Full Team Values and Norms breakdown here

Design Review Materials

Phase I: Problem Definition Agenda - Thursday, September 8, 2016 at 12:45 pm to 1:15pm

  1. Introduce Team
  2. Problem Statement
  3. Meeting Objectives
  4. Stakeholders
  5. Customer Interview
  6. Use scenarios
  7. Deliverables
  8. Customer Requirements
  9. Engineering Requirements
  10. House of quality
  11. Benchmarking Plan
  12. Risk management
  13. Project Plan/WBS
  14. Next steps
  15. Values and Norms
  16. Questions

Home | Planning & Execution | Imagine RIT

Problem Definition | Systems Design | Preliminary Detailed Design | Detailed Design

Build & Test Prep | Subsystem Build & Test | Integrated System Build & Test | Integrated System Build & Test with Customer Demo | Customer Handoff & Final Project Documentation