TEAM FTP LAB 5 Project PFADS n Kyle Harris n Sang Huynh n Bhupinder Shergill n Eric Stolp

TEAM FTP Overview/Outline n Introduction n Objectives n Preliminary Ideas n Refinement n Decision n Construction and Testing

TEAM FTP Overview/Outline (continued) n Results/Discussion n Conclusions n Acknowledgements

TEAM FTP Introduction n Background: –Design and build mobile parabolic food aid delivery system (PFADS) to children in refugee camps

TEAM FTP Introduction (continued) n Objectives: –Device traverses 7 feet down an inclined ramp –Device launches 4-3/8” x 4-3/8” x 5-1/2” package to target 10 feet away and over 6’2” wall located 3’1/2” away from base of the ramp –Practice Teamwork –Practice Formal Presentation skills

TEAM FTP Introduction (continued)

TEAM FTP Introduction (continued) CONSTRAINTS n Weight < 10 lbs n Launch 4-3/8” x 4-3/8” x 5-1/2” box n Spend < $20 n Fit within 18” x 18” x 18” container n Mechanism cannot fall over ramp

TEAM FTP Introduction (continued) CRITERIA n Minimize weight n Minimize dimensions n Package clears 6’2” wall n Package hits target 10 feet from base

TEAM FTP Introduction (continued) n Project Objectives: –Build device to launch FAP over wall –Gain more experience in TEAMWORK –Gain experience in FORMAL PRESENTATIONS

TEAM FTP Preliminary Ideas n Preliminary Idea # 1 –Designed by Sang –PROS Simple Design Simple trigger device Cheap Roll down ramp –CONS Rat trap not support arm Inaccuracy in launch

TEAM FTP Preliminary Ideas (continued) n Preliminary Idea # 2 –Designed by Eric –PROS Surgical tubing Roll down ramp Trigger mechanism –CONS Not gain enough momentum to launch Weight Dimensions

TEAM FTP Preliminary Ideas (continued) n Preliminary Idea # 3 –Designed by Bhup –PROS Power in release Trigger mechanism Accuracy in launch Roll down ramp –CONS Dimensions Weight Instability in arm: break off

TEAM FTP Preliminary Ideas (continued) n Preliminary Idea # 4 –Designed by Kyle –PROS Inclined height Trigger mechanism Strength in arm Roll down ramp –CONS Inconsistency in springs: break off Wooden bars: break off

TEAM FTP Refinement Preferred Ideas n Preliminary Idea #2 –Why Preferred? Surgical Tubes for strength in launch Trigger mechanism –Possible Problems: Weight Dimensions May tip over

TEAM FTP Refinement (continued) n Preliminary Idea #4 –Why Preferred? Inclined Height Trigger mechanism Strength in arm Light in weight –Possible Problems: Inconsistency in springs Wooden bars crack due to pressure May need to make adjustments to arm May tip over

TEAM FTP Decision n Final Design –Incorporated Prelim. Design #2 and #4 into Final design. –PROS: Inclined Height Surgical Tubing Trigger mechanism –CONS: May need to adjust arm frequently Wooden bars may crack due to pressure May Tip Over

TEAM FTP Construction and Testing n Used surgical tubing, drill, hammer, screws, wood, nuts, bolts, metal arms and hinges to construct device –Took place in Wehymes and Southwest n Tested launching mechanism of device in Khoury Hall, in Southwest, and in Wehymes.

TEAM FTP Construction and Testing (continued) n Final Design: –Height: 13.25” –Length: 10” –Width: 9.25” –Weight: 4lbs –Basic design: Tupperware container on metal arm; surgical tubing causes arm to spring up and forward, shooting FAP once device hits 4” wall at base of ramp (triggered by shock of impact)

TEAM FTP Results and Discussion n Heat 1: Failure- FAP hit top of wall n Heat 2: Failure- FAP hit top of wall n Heat 3 (w/out wall): Distance was 6.67 feet past 10 ft marker n Final FOM= n Result: Placed 17th overall

TEAM FTP Results and Discussion (continued) ADVANTAGES n Slid down ramp easily n Triggered every run n Small size and volume n Light in weight n Device did not tip over DISADVANTAGES n Package did not travel over the wall n Package did not hit the 10 foot mark on 3 rd attempt n Surgical tubing lost strength after each run

TEAM FTP Results and Discussion (continued) n Suggested Improvements: –Two surgical tubes instead of one: more support and strength –Adjust arm to improve angle accuracy FAP clears wall and reaches target –Raise platform level of device: Higher inclination –Re-design device upward cannon-type launcher rather than arm launcher – better model as seen in competition

TEAM FTP Conclusions n Key Criteria: –Minimize rectangular volume of design –Minimize weight n Key Constraints: –Device must fit within an 18”x18”x18” container –Device < 10lbs

TEAM FTP Conclusions (continued) n Competition Performance: –Trial 1: Fail –Trial 2: Fail –Trial 3: 6.67 ft off –Final Result: 17 th Place out of 36

TEAM FTP Conclusions (continued) n Improvements: –Two surgical tubes –Adjust arm to improve angle accuracy

TEAM FTP Acknowledgements n Professor Camilla Saviz –Clarification of specifications n Professor Kurt Schulz –Clarification of specifications n Introduction to Engineering: Course Manual –Guidelines to build device n Bob Pollard –Cut wood pieces for device