Table of Contents
The customer change that our group underwent during the Preliminary Detailed Design phase hindered our ability to complete the MSD program objectives, however we are mainly speaking with Gleason to gather information and make a plan for moving forward. While we do not have much information to fill up this page, we can provide our preliminary thoughts and plans.
Team Vision for Detailed Design PhaseOur team plans to meet with several Gleason employees to gather feedback about what they want out of this project, and to then come up with a plan to complete those objectives. We should be able to end the semester with an idea of how to re-engineering the parts, choosing a material, creating the part with the new designs, testing the prototype, doing a cost analysis, etc. It is ambitious to think that completing all of these tasks in one semester is feasible, so we also plan to begin working on these task items. Hopefully this will allow us to hit the first inevitable speed bumps in the process, and it will allow us to start the next semester strong with some fresh ideas moving forward.
Progress ReportThe progress that our team has made the past two phases consists of getting familiar with the Gleason project and formulating a plan. It is clear that Gleason's main goal from this project is to save the company money from producing parts that are used in machines that Gleason produces and sells. These machines are big money makers for the companies that Gleason sells to, and ensuring the quality of these machines is very important to Gleason, because the need to have good customer relations. If a part in the machine that Gleason sells breaks and the machine has to go down, then Gleason's customers will be losing out on a lot of money until the machine is up and running again. Some of the parts that have potential failure modes are very expensive and take a lot of time to make, so it is not in the best interest of Gleason to make the parts until it is absolutely necessary. A downside of this is that a customer of Gleason will be losing money on the machine for every day that Gleason is producing the needed part, leading to an unhappy customer. What Gleason is looking for is a solution that will allow them to produce these parts cheaper and with less lead time so that they may satisfy their customers more thoroughly.
Prototyping, Engineering Analysis, SimulationThe team does not yet have any prototypes. Moving forward, our plans are to first select an AM material that is compatible with the part in question. This will likely be the most difficult step in the process because the material properties must be similar to the material used to create the part currently. The new material must meet part specs having to do with hardness, yield strength, loading types, and other material properties. It is likely that the cost to obtain such a material may be high, but it may be true that Gleason's customer satisfaction would be worth paying a hefty price to produce the parts with a smaller lead time. With the material selected, a re-engineering of the part will take place to ensure analytically that any given section of the part will be able to withstand the loads placed on it. If not, we will need to look into re-dimensioning the part so that there is less concentrated load on the section in question. Once the part is re-engineered and passes each analytic test, it will be produced as a prototype. This should not be much of a problem because RIT will likely have sufficient 3D printing capabilities, and if not our team has already connected with third party companies that may be able to print the parts for us using our specified directions. With that, we will finally have working prototypes that will be able to be subjected to tests to see if our process for creating the parts works. If the prototypes work, the final decision of production feasibility in comparison to the current production process would be up to Gleason.
Drawings, Schematics, Flow Charts, SimulationsThis section will largely not be applicable to this project, as the part drawings and prints contain sensitive information that will not be shared on a public site. However, we will be creating a detailed theory of operation that will go in depth with how the part will be created on a part by part basis, and it will describe the life of the part from production to failure and replacement. This theory of operation will be important for deciding if it is feasible to change production methods because it will be able to be compared to the current process in terms of costs, lead times, and convenience.
Bill of Material (BOM)Once our group has a budget set in place by Gleason, we will be able to create a bill of materials. Currently is seems that it will be unlikely that the project would go over budget, however there will be data to back that up as soon as more information is available.
Test PlansThe scope of our project is to replace parts that are already in existence by using cheaper and more efficient production methods. The current parts must undergo tests in order to pass quality standards before they are put into use. Since the parts we will be creating will be used to serve the same exact function as the old parts, the tests used for the old parts will still be relevant and sufficient. Therefore, it will not be necessary for us to create new tests for the prototypes that we create.
We may need to use testing to learn more about the 3D printing materials. In these cases, we will be able to print parts that can function as test specimens, and we will be able to conduct certain tests to test for material properties. The test specimens for each test will be subject to ASTM standards that are relevant for each type of test. For example, if we conduct a tensile test for metallic materials to find tensile properties, we would need to reference ASTM standard E8. It will only be necessary to do this for materials that could be relevant for replacing current part materials.