DETAILED DESIGN REVIEWWEEK 15

María Camila Luna

Pablo Santizo

Zak Borden

Zach Delurey

AGENDA

Introduction Problem statement Finalized engineering and customer

requirements Proposed process design

Functional decomposition and flow diagram Components of the system Proposed bill of materials

Proposed assembly layout Ergonomics Risk management Team findings

EXPECTATIONS

Validate final design with customer and peers Future steps (Senior Design II)

And schedule for the first 3 weeks Identify areas that need improvement Obtain customer approval for the BOM

PROBLEM STATEMENT

Certain applications require smaller color targets Complications:

Forming component parts Customization requests Final target assembly

Current process: Hand assembled Improper alignment Low yields

The objective: Redesign the manufacturing process Lower costs Higher yields Improve customization ability

CUSTOMER NEEDSCN# Importance Description

CN1 3 Color materials are spectrally accurate.

CN2 3Individual patches are blemish free to provide accurate measurements.

CN3 3 Individual patches are aligned.

CN4 2 Durable base plate.

CN5 2 Logo of the company on the back of the plate.

CN6 3 Targets do not have burn marks or surface cracks.

CN7 1 Targets are resistant to alcohol and water.

CN8 2 Colors are easily and quickly customized.

CN9 1 Target sizes are easily customized.

CN10 1 Fast production time.

CN11 3 Low production cost.

CN12 3 Low cost system redesign.

CN13 3 High yield rates.

CN14 3 Process must be ergonomic.

ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS Source Function

Specification (Metric)

Unit of Measure

Marginal Value

Ideal Value

Testing

S1 CN4 Base design Durability (drop test) Feet 3ft >3ft Drop test

S2 CN9 Base design Target size # of sizes 3 sizes inf. Order one of each desired size

S3 CN3 Individual patches

Positional accuracy with respect to tile size % 5% <5%  Use microscope to verify accuracy

S4 CN5 Base design Logo is present Pass/Fail Pass Pass  Check the logo visibility

S5 CN2/CN6/ CN7 Targets Percent damaged surface % 5 0 Use microscope to verify damage

S6 CN8 Individual patches

Number of patches that can be changed # 30 30

 Test different paper in the laser cutter

S7 CN8 Individual patches

Time to change color scheme Min. 10 5  Time study

S8 CN10 System Cycle time Min. 30 <15 Time study (60 trials) different users

S9 CN11 System Production Cost Dollars 55 25  Add up the individual costs (include labor)

S10 CN12 System System Redesign Budget Dollars 1500 >1500  Add up the investment costs

S11 CN13 System Yield Rate % 90 95 Inspect final products from the time study (n=60)

PROPOSED PROCESS- FLOW DIAGRAM

Cut individual patches*

Manufacture back plates*

Place patches in bins (according

to color)

Arrange bins according to

customer order

Place individual patches and base

plate on static mat/ tilted table

Place adhesive in

pockets

Pick individual patch using vacuum pen

Place patch in correct pockets

using magnification device

Inspect for any flaws using

digital microscope

* Outsourced processes

FUNCTION DECOMPOSITIONProduce properly aligned, highly

customizable, small scale color targetsObtain color

papersChoose specific colors

(customer request)

Cut paper to desired size

Position paper on

cutter

Protect paper form

cutting process

Align patches within

tolerancesIdentify pattern

according to customer

order

Vertically and

horizontally align

patches

Check quality

Secure colors in placePrevent patches

from shifting

Protect target from

damage

Inspect final product

BACK PLATE

First iteration of prototypes: Material: Renshape® SL 7820 black

resin Quantity: 10 small, 5 large Overall length

0.495” Small target 0.850” Large target

Depth of pockets= 0.01”

Feasibility of 3D printing Pocket allows for self-aligning Pockets were not deep enough Pockets and patches size did not

match

BACK PLATE (CONT.)

BACK PLATE (CONT.)

PLATE APocket width

BRib

width

CTotal

thickness

DPocket depth

WWall

thickenss

1 0.0625”

0.010” 0.0625” 0.020” 0.025”

2 (gutters) 0.0625”

0.010” 0.0938” 0.020” 0.025”

3 0.0554 0.010” 0.0625” 0.015”-.030”

0.029”

4 0.050” 0.015” 0.0625” 0.015”-.030”

0.032”

5 0.115” 0.010” 0.0625” 0.015”-.030”

0.036”

6 0.100” 0.025” 0.0625” 0.015”-.030”

0.044”

Second Iteration Prototypes:

COLOR PATCHES

Laser cutter process outsourced Test the different samples given by customer

Small variability 0.056” Small target 0.196” Large target

Customer wants to keep working with current employee

Possible back-up plan: Boston Laser Cutter

VACUUM PEN

Problems identified earlier and potential solution: Picks up more than one tile Tile flips when dropped into the pocket Learning curve

Ergonomics expert opinion: Vibration is not a problem Sound is not a problem

ADHESIVE

Spray Adhesive Scotch: Photo Mount

5 minutes curing time Dry clear

Krylon : High strength 30 minutes curing time Does not dry clear Not a feasible solution

Liquid Adhesive Gorilla superglue

Long curing time Dry clear

No test for reflectance available Increases cycle time

Tested by the costumer

21

3

TEST FOR COLOR REFLECTANCE (SCOTCH PHOTO MOUNTING)

First set of experiments: Individual patch placed immediately after

spraying the adhesive Delta E on the yellow patch 2.2

visible difference

360

380

400

420

440

460

480

500

520

540

560

580

600

620

640

660

680

700

720

7400

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2 Yellow no glue5 Yellow glue10 Yellow glue 3days

WAVE LENGTH (nm)

REFLEC

TA

NC

E (

%)

TEST FOR COLOR REFLECTANCE (SCOTCH PHOTO MOUNTING)

New application process Wait 1:30 min. after spraying the adhesive

Delta E decreased from 2.2 to 0.1 0.1 (no visible change)

360

380

400

420

440

460

480

500

520

540

560

580

600

620

640

660

680

700

720

7400

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Yellow no glueYellow glue 5 min

WAVELENGTH (nm)

REFLEC

TA

NC

E (

%)

ADDITIONAL TESTING

In order to test the actual curing time a small target was sprayed The tester waited 8 minutes and then start

placing the individual patches After all the patches were placed the target was

dropped form 3ft in order to test the adhesive quality

All of the patches stayed in place

STATIC MAT & TURNING TILTED PLATE

Static Mat: Help to keep the individual patches before they

are placed in the target

Tilted Plate: Table rotates and tilts to ease the placement of

the patches Ergonomic improvement: Helps to improve the position

of the user Non-skid surface to hold the plate and reduce

the necessity of two hands handling

BINS

Keep the individual patches separated by color and sizes

Increase the organization of the layout Reduces the preparation time

2 different Bins 64 drawers 39 drawers

MAGNIFICATION DEVICE

Customer ordered a set of professional magnifying lenses Allows for people with corrective lenses Reduces the problem of going into and out of the

magnification range Reduces ergonomic problems Comfortable for the user

DIGITAL MICROSCOPE

Inspection/quality purposes Measurement software Increase quality control Reduces time

Not for alignment purposes: Difficult of use (working in one are while looking

at another)

BILL OF MATERIALSPart Name Part No. Size Price

Color patches N/A 1/8, 1/16” N/A

Back plate N/A 0.69* 0.81” , 0.44*0.38”

$10.00

Vacuum pen & accessories

V8100A 3*3*6” $499.00

Photo mount spray adhesive

B001680QHW 4.25 Ounce $13.18

Bins 10164/ HA01039001

20*16*6 ½”/19.5*15.8*6.2”

$30.14/$31.72

Tilting turntable B000674S4Q 7 ¾” $61.40

Magnification lenses

Provided by Customer

Provided by Customer

$1300

Digital microscope Provided by Customer

Provided by Customer

$1100

Static mat Provided by Customer

Provided by Customer

$850

ASSEMBLY LAYOUT

ERGONOMICS

Main problem: posture and length of the task Sound and vibration are not issues Early to make a decision

First pick a design Then consider ergonomic issues

Consider inexpensive solutions Turning table instead of whole table Inexpensive microscope/ magnification device

RISK MANAGEMENT

Link to updated risk management New Risks

Adhesive fails over time Original Sized parts make patches too small to

cut Gutters cause structural weakness

PLANS FOR SENIOR DESIGN II

Review project state Costumer and engineer requirements with

costumer Inventory of hardware and parts Review long term adhesive test Select adhesive and method Test prototypes

Varying depths and wall sizes Update customer with results Create optimized back plate Trial run process

Ergonomic or other issues

LESSONS LEARNED

Include several test variables on prototypes Previously plan for the next steps following

an experiment Keep organized notes for every meeting Adapt to changes in scope and initial

conditions Importance of risk management Continuous process

Questions?