Content linked within the Systems Design page can be found in the Systems Level Design Documents directory.
Team Vision for System-Level Design Phase
After completing the Phase 1 Review, a more in depth analysis was done on the system level components in order to determine the best fit for the end result. During the System Level Design Phase, the benchmarking and morphological tables were created in order to think of all possible options for each component needed in the final design. Concept Selection criteria were then created in order to rate each complete system design to then see the best option moving forward.
The System Level Design Phases showed that difficult decisions needed to be made and it was determined by the team that most would need to be determined after the Honduras Research Team visited Hospital Escuela, the client at hand.
The trip was immensely successful and allowed for our project manager to come back with more medical knowledge and requests from the doctors and nurses on hand. Although the project changed, the team was able to make the necessary adjustments in order to accommodate the client.
While the Customer Requirements have narrowed to a more realistic and feasible list, there are still major constraints that need to be considered and accounted for. The battery length and total incubator weight are the largest constraints seen at this point in the project. During the System Level Design, feasibility analysis were done on the battery life and weight based on devices seen in industry at this point in time.
The goal and deliverable for the project have not changed since the Project Description Phase. The team is still on track to create a working prototype, Bill of Materials as well as a written and visual guide for manufacturing and maintaining the incubator.
Functional DecompositionThe functional decomposition of the system level can be seen in the image below. The document owner is Victoria Tripp.
Link to the full functional decomposition can be found here
BenchmarkingThe benchmarking table seen below was broken up between the team in order for members to focus on their strengths in the project and provide he team with their knowledge on the components. The table shows detailed breakdowns of each system needed in the design as well as a brief feasibility analysis and pros and cons list in order to compare and contract the components accordingly. The document owner is Brenna Woodling.
Link to the full Benchmarking document can be found here
Feasibility: Prototyping, Analysis, Simulation
Feasibility analysis were drafted for the most important concerns with the project. The focus was determiend to be no the battery longevity, cost, weight, and containment of heat in the system. Below are the drafted calculations and research done which will be further developed in the phases to come.
The battery feasibility was completed by Jen Russo.
The cost and weight feasibility was completed by Victoria Tripp.
The heat transfer feasibility was completed by Nick DeChane.
Morphological ChartThe morphological chart below shows the number of options considered for each system needed in the design along with helpful visuals. The document owner is Victoria Tripp.
Link to the full morphological chart can be found here
Concept Selection Criteria
A list of concept criteria were determined by the team considering the country of Honduras and the scope of the project. Below is the completed list which was then used in the next phase of the concept selection, concept development. The owner of this tab of the document is Victoria Tripp.
Link to the full concept screening can be found here here
Using the concept criteria, different concepts were created fro each of the criteria. The morphological and benchmarking tables were useful with this development. Below are some of the eleven concepts developed. The owner for this tab in the document is Ashley Pitters.
After the selection criteria and development were completed, a rating system was used to determine the leading concepts in order to move forward in the system level design. The rating system used was a simple plus, minus, neutral score. A sum of the scores were calculated for each concept and ties were further discussed by the team to determine which would be rated higher. The owner of this tab in the document is Victoria Tripp.
Top Rated Concepts
The top rated concepts were Concept 7, Concept 5 and Concept 2 respectively.
Concept 7: Transportable Concept 5: Readily Available Concept 2: Cost Effective
The concept selection document containing the selection criteria,concept development, as well as the concept rating analysis can be found here.
The system architecture was discussed and determined by the team and is open to improvement during the phases to come. The current idea is to have the heavier, harder to carry components in a backpack while the incubator itself along with the sensors attached to the infant are located in front of the carrier. In doing this, the carrier will have the back to support heavy components to make travel easier while also being able to have a simple visual of the infant and vitals. The document owner is Jennifer Russo.
The systems architecture document can be found here.
Designs and Flowcharts
Below are flowcharts of the top three concepts determined during the concept selection. Concept 7 was determined to be the best system concept, while Concepts 5 and 2 were a close second and third. The document owner is Suleman Ullah.
Overall Design Concepts
From these concept flowcharts, some overall design concepts were created and can be seen below.
PurposeThe Failure Mode Effects Analysis (FMEA) allows for an in depth evaluation of any potential risks during the use of the product. When evaluating risks, a cause and effect are assigned in order to determine the root of the issue and define countermeasures to lower the potential occurrence.
Updated Assessment OverviewThe document owner is Victoria Tripp.
The updated risk assessment document can be found here.
Design Review Materials
Design Review Presentation for the problem definition review can be found here
Plans for next phase
Now that this phase is complete, the team has decided on a system level design in order to forward. Some basic concept drawings have been made for the next phase of the project in order to help brainstorm where the system components will lie. In the next phase, more detailed designs will be worked out as well as the start of a Bill of Materials. The team has high expectations with being able to move forward more quickly than the beginning of the project after the Honduras Research team returned with more answers and a better understanding of the project.
In the next phase, team members will be driven to:
- Continue to find risks within the project as the development continues
- Contribute in team discussions
- Solidify components within system to further benchmark
- Research and determine exterior materials considering cost and weight
- Be creative in developing detailed drawings