400 likes | 563 Vues
Prepared by: Jeanelle Baldric Matt Borkowski Doug Mcnarland Jacob Sellers . Can Crusher. AGENDA. Group development Research and generating ideas Developing our design Designing out design Building our design Design changes Lessons learned. THE TEAM.
E N D
Prepared by: Jeanelle Baldric Matt Borkowski Doug Mcnarland Jacob Sellers Can Crusher
AGENDA • Group development • Research and generating ideas • Developing our design • Designing out design • Building our design • Design changes • Lessons learned
THE TEAM • Leader: Doug MacNerland • Scribe: Matt Borkowski & Jacob Sellers • Timekeeper: Jeanelle Baldric
CONSTITUTION • Respect each other and the project • Work hard • Listen to one another • Encourage, not discourage • Stay on track • Spend time outside of class and in study hall • Ask for help if needed • Never give up
THE PROBLEM • Problem statement: We work for Alpha Engineering Company. Roadrunner Trucking, a customer of our company, has received a notice indicating that the total volume of the aluminum cans the company disposes must be crushed to a minimum of 1.5”.
BACKGROUND & JUSTIFICATION • The can needs to be crushed 70% of its original size • 18” x 24” x 30” • Wood, pvc, metal brackets, metal hinges, screws and nails. • 5% bonus if self-loading • Bin must hold up to 20 crushed cans • Manually operated
CUSTOMER • One customer • Mr. Pritchard – ITC instructor
SCOPE • Task: Design a can crusher • Main source: Internet • Subject Material: • Calculations – Hernacki • Building & Testing – Pritchard • CAD Drawings – Hund
DELIVERABLES • Can Crusher Design • Technical Report • Powerpoint
BRAINSTORMING • Who came up with the can crusher? • When was the original can crusher made? • What kind of wood is best used for building? • How big is the average soda can? • How much force is needed to crush a can to 20% of its original size? • Safety hazards
RESEARCH & GENERATE IDEAS • Can Crusher: device used for crushing soda cans for easy storage in recycling bins
CRITERIA AND CONSTRAINTS • 30% Crushed than original size
EXPLORE POSSIBILITIES • Four designs • Jacob’s • Jeanelle’s • Matt’s • Doug’s • Evaluated different materials
JACOB’S DESIGN • -INSERT DESIGN-
JEANELLE’S DESIGN • -INSERT DESIGN-
MATT’S DESIGN • -INSERT DESIGN-
DOUG’S DESIGN • -INSERT DESIGN-
WOOD TYPE (Ranked 1-5 with 5 being the best)
PUT TOGETHER (Ranked 1-5 with 5 being the best)
SELECT AN APPROACH (Ranked 1-5 with 5 being the best)
FINAL DESIGN • -INSERT IDW OF DISASSMBLY OF FINAL DESIGN-
DESIGN PROPOSAL • Detail CAD drawings for subsystems • Bill of materials • Build process • Test plan
Subsystem CAD Drawings • Lever • -INSERT DESIGN-
Subsystem CAD Drawings • Bin • -INSERT DESIGN-
Subsystem CAD Drawings • Self-loading • -INSERT DESIGN-
Subsystem CAD Drawings • Top • -INSERT DESIGN-
BUILD PROCESS • - INSERT BUILD PROCESS – GET FROM DOUG
PROTOTYPE • Work process kept us organized • 2 weeks worth of build time • Many errors during building • Whole new design
TEST AND MONITOR • Entire design fell apart • Major issues to the design
REFINING THE DESIGN • Made an entire new design • Wider than original • Bigger bin • Better crushing design • Much more stable
REFINED DESIGN • - PUT NEW DESIGN – FULL ASSEMBLY
TEST AND MONITOR #2 • Major issues fixed • Problems gone • Easy to crush
LESSONS LEARNED • Don’t make complicated designs • Simplicity • Time Management • How to make a quality timeline
OVERALL SUMMARY • Had major problems with getting along • Staying on task • First design was a failure • Second design turned out good