P14417: B9 Plastics - Particle Filter Detailed Design Review Dan Anderson / Thomas Heberle / Perry Hosmer / Karina Roundtree / Kelly Stover December 10,

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Intel Water Reclaim Project Final Report 5/25/05.
Advertisements

Copyright 2010, The World Bank Group. All Rights Reserved. Statistical Project Monitoring Section B 1.
The Pet Waterer FluiDivas Lindsey Ehinger, Laura Mar, Stephanie Wedekind, Kimberly Wilson CEE 454 Design Project.
Israel Powell - CE An Vu - CE John Markidis - ME Dan Charles - CE Sarah Brownell – Faculty Guide B9 Plastics Inc. – Customer Project.
EYYUP ORAK Material requirements planning (MRP) is a computer-based inventory management system designed to assist production managers in.
P14417: B9 Particle Filter Cycle 3: System Integration and Testing Dan Anderson Thomas Heberle Perry Hosmer Karina Roundtree Kelly Stover.
Richard Dzionara-Norsen Jeffery Flowerday Jonathan Nguyen Kassandra Schlott.
Determining Uses of Water. Next Generation Science / Common Core Standards Addressed! HS ‐ ETS1 ‐ 2. Design a solution to a complex real ‐ world problem.
Power System for the Better Water Maker ● Introduce Team ● Project Background ● Problem Objectives and Statement ● Use Scenarios ● Prioritized.
P09011 Object Recognition Detailed Design Review February 12, 2009.
Figure 5.1: Inputs, Outputs, and Feedback 1 Transformation (Conversion) Process Energy Materials Labor Capital Information Goods or Services Feedback information.
Clean Water for Everyone Biofilter Project Presented on November 14, 2005.
Experimental Design Fr. Clinic II Dr. J. W. Everett.
Fresh Bread and Roll Scaling Room MSD II Final Presentation Erik Webster, Cecilia Enestrom, Kate Gleason, Grant Garbach, Andrew Tsai May 15 th, 2009.
Team Aquifers: Flow Control Device James Berg Jamison Hill Stephen Russo Scott Weeks CEE December 2004.
Product Design and Process Selection
Narbeh dereghishian - edgardo garcia - ana montenegro - calvin ting - kevin tjho.
Clean Water for Good and Solid Health. Our customers are the one billion people around the world without access to clean drinking water. While more than.
Particle and Fluoride Pre-Filter for B9 Plastics Dan Charles – Chemical Engineer John Markidis – Mechanical Engineering Israel Powell – Chemical Engineering.
Wegmans Frozen Cookie Capacity Increase Final Project Presentation Richard Latham, Bridget Eggers, Tyler Brent, Valeria Gonzalez.
Power Generation for the Better Water Maker: Subsystems Design Review October 29, 2013.
Permanent Housing for a Ceramic Oil Filter MIM U702 Capstone Design reNU Design Team Dale Kochevar Kelly Seitz Marco Solia Barrett Straub Matt Whalen MIM.
Introduction to Systems Analysis and Design Trisha Cummings.
Initiating and Planning Systems Development projects
REUSE–A–MUG Yellow B. Lack of access to clean water or adequate water purifying devices is a major problem 6,000 children die every day from diseases.
Detailed Design Review: Pre-Filter P13418
1 Quality Center 10.0 NOTE: Uninstall the current version of QC before downloading QC All QC 10.0 documents can be located on the BI Shared Services.
MAGNA M a g n a D i g i t e c h I n d i a P r i v a t e L i m i t e d STEEL FABRICATTION TO DUCTILE IRON CASTING CONVERSION PROJECT NAME: CHARGE AIR PIPE.
P14417: B9 Particle Filter Introduction & Background Results Daniel Anderson, Thomas Heberle, Perry Hosmer, Karina Roundtree and Kelly Stover Design and.
P14417: B9 Plastics - Particle Filter Subsystem Design Dan Anderson / Thomas Heberle / Perry Hosmer / Karina Roundtree / Kelly Stover October 29, 2013.
SacProNet An Overview of Project Management Techniques.
P14417: B9 Plastics - Particle Filter Problem Definition
Ergonomics Regulatory Requirements Bawan Saravanabawan, Labour Program, HRSDC February 4, 2008.
High Temperature Waste Pasteurizer Brian Kilger Kyle Cohn Kyle Weston Stephanie Mauro P13411.
Israel Powell - CE An Vu - CE John Markidis - ME Dan Charles - CE Sarah Brownell – Faculty Guide B9 Plastics Inc. – Customer Project.
Sampling Error.  When we take a sample, our results will not exactly equal the correct results for the whole population. That is, our results will be.
Sampling Fundamentals 2 Sampling Process Identify Target Population Select Sampling Procedure Determine Sampling Frame Determine Sample Size.
 Watch the Peel Water Treatment Tours › Water Treatment Plant Tours Water Treatment Plant Tours  Complete the reading on Peel’s Water Treatment Process.
FUNCTIONUSERMANUFACTURINGMARKETINGENVIRONMENTALMATERIALS MUST Aid the stability of the kayak both when moving and when stationary. Prevent roll from movement.
Introduction to System Analysis and Design MADE BY: SIR NASEEM AHMED KHAN DOW VOCATIONAL & TECHNICAL TRAINING CENTRE.
P14417: B9 Particle Filter Dan Anderson Thomas Heberle Perry Hosmer Karina Roundtree Kelly Stover.
Post Mid-Term Review and Layout Drawings October 9, 2006 Team Moondogs Chris Culver Rahul Kirtikar Elias Krauklis Christopher Sampson Michael Widerquist.
Product Development Chapter 12. Vocabulary Research and development (R&D): the process of gathering information and using that information to develop.
“UV Tube” Water Disinfection P07402 Project Review 23 February 2007 Sponsored by Dr. Andres Carrano and Dr. Brian Thorn of the KGCOE ISE Department.
Roadmap to Greener Computing Henri Mikkola. Eco-Friendly Product Lifecycle Today through globalization products travel long distances before reaching.
Project Management Techniques for Test Estimation Optimization
Purchasing Suppliers.
Lecture (11): Water Distribution Systems
Sample Fit-Gap Kick-off
P14417: B9 Plastics - Particle Filter System Design
ME Spring 2015 Systems Engineering, Part II
Particle and Fluoride Pre-Filter for B9 Plastics
merchandising operations
“UV Tube” Water Disinfection P07402
Rochester Institute of Technology P17487: KonTiki Kiln Heat Recovery
Learning Objective 3 Define the ratings in a portable fire extinguisher rating system.
Experimental Procedure
Complete Buying Process
OVERVIEW Debate in engineering design community: Should design be taught as: Establishing a foundation of theory? or Engaging students in loosely supervised.
P07021: Instrument to Detect Thromboemboli
LAMAS Working Group 7-8 December 2015
Breadfruit Flour Grinder
Tub Lift Rev. 2 Dom Group
P14417: B9 Plastics - Particle Filter Detailed Design Review
Final Status Update P09006 – Upper Extremity Exerciser
Power Generation System for the Better Water Maker
Unit 6.3 Lesson 5 It is not required to use all slides in this template, adjust delivery as the lesson requires. Slides.
Definitions Cumulative time to failure (T): Mean life:
Detailed Design Review
Lesson 3.2 Product Planning
Presentation transcript:

P14417: B9 Plastics - Particle Filter Detailed Design Review Dan Anderson / Thomas Heberle / Perry Hosmer / Karina Roundtree / Kelly Stover December 10, 2013

Agenda Problem Definition (time?) Updated Design and Bill of Materials Justification (time?) Test Plans (time?) Assembly Procedure (time?) Project Management (time?)

Problem Definition

Problem Statement Current State: In order to use the Better Water Maker (BWM) users must first pour the water through a cloth before being treated. Desired State: The device should clear particles from water to allow the BWM to operate more effectively. The device should be simple to use and operable by both women and children. Project Goals: Analyze the design selected by P13418 Improve the effectiveness of the Better Water Maker Notable Constraints: Must be usable by both women and children Only locally available materials may be consumed Must not negatively impact the smell and taste of water

Project Scope & Deliverables Project Scope o Eliminate particles greater than 5 microns in size o Produce a design that is economically viable for use in developing countries o Design the device to be reusable, and use only consumable parts that are locally available Deliverables to date o Functional prototype o Bill of Materials o Design Drawings o Assembly and manufacturing plan o Test plan and results

Customer Requirements Customer Requirement CategoryDescriptionImportance CR1Ease of UseEasy to prepare for use9 CR2Ease of UseLightweight for user transport / shipping3 CR3Ease of UseHas a minimal startup period3 CR4Ease of UseOperates using only naturally available energy9 CR5EconomicsInexpensive9 CR6EconomicsUsable by a family of 5, for 2-5 years without full replacement9 CR7Economics Requires no consumables for operation (other than cheap and locally available materials) 9 CR8FunctionalityImproves UV transmission9 CR9FunctionalityDecreases turbidity9 CR10FunctionalityDecreases total suspended solids9 CR11FunctionalityDoes not negatively affect taste3 CR12SafetyDoes not negatively affect safety of water9 CR13FunctionalityFilters enough water for a family of 5, daily3

Engineering Requirements CategoryScoreCustomer RequirementFunctionMetricUnitsMarginalTarget Ease of Use3Easy to clean / rechargeEasy to prepare for useTime to cleanminutes105 Ease of Use3Easy to clean / rechargeEasy to prepare for use Number of tools required for cleaning by the end user -21 Ease of Use3Lightweight for transportMinimize weight of filterWeight in lbslbs105 Ease of Use3Has a minimal start-up period.Minimize start-up Time elapsed between beginning of pour and first water that enters the bucket seconds3010 Ease of Use3 Operates using only energy available naturally (gravity, human power, etc.) Doesn't need power source Binary (Yes/No)--No Economics3Filter is inexpensiveMinimize cost of filterTotal cost to produceUS $2520 Economics3 Usable by a family of 5, for 2-5 years w/out full replacement Maximize durability of filter Mean Time To Failure# of uses Economics9 Requires no consumables for operation, except for very cheap & locally available materials (salt, soap, sand, etc.) Minimize cost to maintain Annual cost to operateUS $20 Functionality9Decreases turbidityTurbidity is decreasedPercentage Decrease%>50%>75% Functionality9Decreases total suspended solids Total suspended solids decreased Percentage Decrease%>50%>75% Functionality3 Does not negatively affect the taste of the water No negative taste of water Percent of people who say water tastes the same or better %>50%>75% Safety3No hazardous releases Doesn't produce hazardous release, no chemicals added Binary (Yes/No)--No Functionality3Use Scenarios Provides enough water for family of 5, dailyFlowratelpm

Updated Design and Bill of Materials

Updated Drawing – CAD Drawing

Updated Drawing – Exploded BOM

Bottomless Bucket

Bucket in BOM chosen was inexpensive Most buckets would work

Lid

Matches bucket bottom, reusable Inexpensive

5 Micron Mesh

Stainless steel- limits corrosion Material often used in filters

Bucket

Inexpensive 5 gallon deemed a good size Same as bottomless bucket

Spacer

Rod

Spacer and Rods Used to seal in mesh in assembly and to provide space between mesh and lid

Indented BOM

Assembly Procedure

Steps…

Engineering Requirements

CategoryScoreCustomer RequirementFunctionMetricUnitsMarginalTarget Ease of Use3Easy to clean / rechargeEasy to prepare for useTime to cleanminutes105 Ease of Use3Easy to clean / rechargeEasy to prepare for use Number of tools required for cleaning by the end user -21 Ease of Use3Lightweight for transportMinimize weight of filterWeight in lbslbs105 Ease of Use3Has a minimal start-up period.Minimize start-up Time elapsed between beginning of pour and first water that enters the bucket seconds3010 Ease of Use3 Operates using only energy available naturally (gravity, human power, etc.) Doesn't need power source Binary (Yes/No)--No Economics3Filter is inexpensiveMinimize cost of filterTotal cost to produceUS $2520 Economics3 Usable by a family of 5, for 2-5 years w/out full replacement Maximize durability of filter Mean Time To Failure# of uses Economics9 Requires no consumables for operation, except for very cheap & locally available materials (salt, soap, sand, etc.) Minimize cost to maintain Annual cost to operateUS $20 Functionality9Decreases turbidityTurbidity is decreasedPercentage Decrease%>50%>75% Functionality9Decreases total suspended solids Total suspended solids decreased Percentage Decrease%>50%>75% Functionality3 Does not negatively affect the taste of the water No negative taste of water Percent of people who say water tastes the same or better %>50%>75% Safety3No hazardous releases Doesn't produce hazardous release, no chemicals added Binary (Yes/No)--No Functionality3Use Scenarios Provides enough water for family of 5, dailyFlowratelpm

Time to Clean Pilot study: select 30 participants, provide cleaning instructions, time the process Hypothesis test (95% confidence) on the average time to clean product o H 0 : µ >= 5 minutes o H A : µ < 5 minutes Adjustments in sample size (i.e. additional observations) may be necessary depending on the variance in the observed results If the cleaning time is over the target value of 5 minutes, test for marginal success of 10 minutes

CategoryScoreCustomer RequirementFunctionMetricUnitsMarginalTarget Ease of Use3Easy to clean / rechargeEasy to prepare for useTime to cleanminutes105 Ease of Use3Easy to clean / rechargeEasy to prepare for use Number of tools required for cleaning by the end user -21 Ease of Use3Lightweight for transportMinimize weight of filterWeight in lbslbs105 Ease of Use3Has a minimal start-up period.Minimize start-up Time elapsed between beginning of pour and first water that enters the bucket seconds3010 Ease of Use3 Operates using only energy available naturally (gravity, human power, etc.) Doesn't need power source Binary (Yes/No)--No Economics3Filter is inexpensiveMinimize cost of filterTotal cost to produceUS $2520 Economics3 Usable by a family of 5, for 2-5 years w/out full replacement Maximize durability of filter Mean Time To Failure# of uses Economics9 Requires no consumables for operation, except for very cheap & locally available materials (salt, soap, sand, etc.) Minimize cost to maintain Annual cost to operateUS $20 Functionality9Decreases turbidityTurbidity is decreasedPercentage Decrease%>50%>75% Functionality9Decreases total suspended solids Total suspended solids decreased Percentage Decrease%>50%>75% Functionality3 Does not negatively affect the taste of the water No negative taste of water Percent of people who say water tastes the same or better %>50%>75% Safety3No hazardous releases Doesn't produce hazardous release, no chemicals added Binary (Yes/No)--No Functionality3Use Scenarios Provides enough water for family of 5, dailyFlowratelpm Engineering Requirements

Number of Tools Required for Cleaning Count of tools required Nylon cloth is best material to clean this stainless steel mesh Image of brush (KARINA WILL DECIDE THIS)

Engineering Requirements CategoryScoreCustomer RequirementFunctionMetricUnitsMarginalTarget Ease of Use3Easy to clean / rechargeEasy to prepare for useTime to cleanminutes105 Ease of Use3Easy to clean / rechargeEasy to prepare for use Number of tools required for cleaning by the end user -21 Ease of Use3Lightweight for transportMinimize weight of filterWeight in lbslbs105 Ease of Use3Has a minimal start-up period.Minimize start-up Time elapsed between beginning of pour and first water that enters the bucket seconds3010 Ease of Use3 Operates using only energy available naturally (gravity, human power, etc.) Doesn't need power source Binary (Yes/No)--No Economics3Filter is inexpensiveMinimize cost of filterTotal cost to produceUS $2520 Economics3 Usable by a family of 5, for 2-5 years w/out full replacement Maximize durability of filter Mean Time To Failure# of uses Economics9 Requires no consumables for operation, except for very cheap & locally available materials (salt, soap, sand, etc.) Minimize cost to maintain Annual cost to operateUS $20 Functionality9Decreases turbidityTurbidity is decreasedPercentage Decrease%>50%>75% Functionality9Decreases total suspended solids Total suspended solids decreased Percentage Decrease%>50%>75% Functionality3 Does not negatively affect the taste of the water No negative taste of water Percent of people who say water tastes the same or better %>50%>75% Safety3No hazardous releases Doesn't produce hazardous release, no chemicals added Binary (Yes/No)--No Functionality3Use Scenarios Provides enough water for family of 5, dailyFlowratelpm

Weight ComponentQuantityWeight/assembly (lbs) Bucket23.60 Lid micron mesh Total4.33

Engineering Requirements CategoryScoreCustomer RequirementFunctionMetricUnitsMarginalTarget Ease of Use3Easy to clean / rechargeEasy to prepare for useTime to cleanminutes105 Ease of Use3Easy to clean / rechargeEasy to prepare for use Number of tools required for cleaning by the end user -21 Ease of Use3Lightweight for transportMinimize weight of filterWeight in lbslbs105 Ease of Use3Has a minimal start-up period.Minimize start-up Time elapsed between beginning of pour and first water that enters the bucket seconds3010 Ease of Use3 Operates using only energy available naturally (gravity, human power, etc.) Doesn't need power source Binary (Yes/No)--No Economics3Filter is inexpensiveMinimize cost of filterTotal cost to produceUS $2520 Economics3 Usable by a family of 5, for 2-5 years w/out full replacement Maximize durability of filter Mean Time To Failure# of uses Economics9 Requires no consumables for operation, except for very cheap & locally available materials (salt, soap, sand, etc.) Minimize cost to maintain Annual cost to operateUS $20 Functionality9Decreases turbidityTurbidity is decreasedPercentage Decrease%>50%>75% Functionality9Decreases total suspended solids Total suspended solids decreased Percentage Decrease%>50%>75% Functionality3 Does not negatively affect the taste of the water No negative taste of water Percent of people who say water tastes the same or better %>50%>75% Safety3No hazardous releases Doesn't produce hazardous release, no chemicals added Binary (Yes/No)--No Functionality3Use Scenarios Provides enough water for family of 5, dailyFlowratelpm

Start-up Time Pilot study: collect 30 observations of start up time Hypothesis test (95% confidence) on the average start up time o H 0 : µ >= 10 seconds o H A : µ < 10 seconds Adjustments in sample size (i.e. additional observations) may be necessary depending on the variance in the observed results If the cleaning time is over the target value of 10 seconds, test for marginal success of 30 seconds

Engineering Requirements CategoryScoreCustomer RequirementFunctionMetricUnitsMarginalTarget Ease of Use3Easy to clean / rechargeEasy to prepare for useTime to cleanminutes105 Ease of Use3Easy to clean / rechargeEasy to prepare for use Number of tools required for cleaning by the end user -21 Ease of Use3Lightweight for transportMinimize weight of filterWeight in lbslbs105 Ease of Use3Has a minimal start-up period.Minimize start-up Time elapsed between beginning of pour and first water that enters the bucket seconds3010 Ease of Use3 Operates using only energy available naturally (gravity, human power, etc.) Doesn't need power source Binary (Yes/No)--No Economics3Filter is inexpensiveMinimize cost of filterTotal cost to produceUS $2520 Economics3 Usable by a family of 5, for 2-5 years w/out full replacement Maximize durability of filter Mean Time To Failure# of uses Economics9 Requires no consumables for operation, except for very cheap & locally available materials (salt, soap, sand, etc.) Minimize cost to maintain Annual cost to operateUS $20 Functionality9Decreases turbidityTurbidity is decreasedPercentage Decrease%>50%>75% Functionality9Decreases total suspended solids Total suspended solids decreased Percentage Decrease%>50%>75% Functionality3 Does not negatively affect the taste of the water No negative taste of water Percent of people who say water tastes the same or better %>50%>75% Safety3No hazardous releases Doesn't produce hazardous release, no chemicals added Binary (Yes/No)--No Functionality3Use Scenarios Provides enough water for family of 5, dailyFlowratelpm

No Power Source Needed Show a picture of the design on this page “Based on our design, there is no power source necessary”

Engineering Requirements CategoryScoreCustomer RequirementFunctionMetricUnitsMarginalTarget Ease of Use3Easy to clean / rechargeEasy to prepare for useTime to cleanminutes105 Ease of Use3Easy to clean / rechargeEasy to prepare for use Number of tools required for cleaning by the end user -21 Ease of Use3Lightweight for transportMinimize weight of filterWeight in lbslbs105 Ease of Use3Has a minimal start-up period.Minimize start-up Time elapsed between beginning of pour and first water that enters the bucket seconds3010 Ease of Use3 Operates using only energy available naturally (gravity, human power, etc.) Doesn't need power source Binary (Yes/No)--No Economics3Filter is inexpensiveMinimize cost of filterTotal cost to produceUS $2520 Economics3 Usable by a family of 5, for 2-5 years w/out full replacement Maximize durability of filter Mean Time To Failure# of uses Economics9 Requires no consumables for operation, except for very cheap & locally available materials (salt, soap, sand, etc.) Minimize cost to maintain Annual cost to operateUS $20 Functionality9Decreases turbidityTurbidity is decreasedPercentage Decrease%>50%>75% Functionality9Decreases total suspended solids Total suspended solids decreased Percentage Decrease%>50%>75% Functionality3 Does not negatively affect the taste of the water No negative taste of water Percent of people who say water tastes the same or better %>50%>75% Safety3No hazardous releases Doesn't produce hazardous release, no chemicals added Binary (Yes/No)--No Functionality3Use Scenarios Provides enough water for family of 5, dailyFlowratelpm

Total Cost of Components ComponentQuantityCost/assembly Bucket2$5.94 Lid1$ micron mesh0.54$6.32 Brush Total

Labor Cost Estimations Based on the assembly plans

Engineering Requirements CategoryScoreCustomer RequirementFunctionMetricUnitsMarginalTarget Ease of Use3Easy to clean / rechargeEasy to prepare for useTime to cleanminutes105 Ease of Use3Easy to clean / rechargeEasy to prepare for use Number of tools required for cleaning by the end user -21 Ease of Use3Lightweight for transportMinimize weight of filterWeight in lbslbs105 Ease of Use3Has a minimal start-up period.Minimize start-up Time elapsed between beginning of pour and first water that enters the bucket seconds3010 Ease of Use3 Operates using only energy available naturally (gravity, human power, etc.) Doesn't need power source Binary (Yes/No)--No Economics3Filter is inexpensiveMinimize cost of filterTotal cost to produceUS $2520 Economics3 Usable by a family of 5, for 2-5 years w/out full replacement Maximize durability of filter Mean Time To Failure# of uses Economics9 Requires no consumables for operation, except for very cheap & locally available materials (salt, soap, sand, etc.) Minimize cost to maintain Annual cost to operateUS $20 Functionality9Decreases turbidityTurbidity is decreasedPercentage Decrease%>50%>75% Functionality9Decreases total suspended solids Total suspended solids decreased Percentage Decrease%>50%>75% Functionality3 Does not negatively affect the taste of the water No negative taste of water Percent of people who say water tastes the same or better %>50%>75% Safety3No hazardous releases Doesn't produce hazardous release, no chemicals added Binary (Yes/No)--No Functionality3Use Scenarios Provides enough water for family of 5, dailyFlowratelpm

Mean Time to Failure

Engineering Requirements CategoryScoreCustomer RequirementFunctionMetricUnitsMarginalTarget Ease of Use3Easy to clean / rechargeEasy to prepare for useTime to cleanminutes105 Ease of Use3Easy to clean / rechargeEasy to prepare for use Number of tools required for cleaning by the end user -21 Ease of Use3Lightweight for transportMinimize weight of filterWeight in lbslbs105 Ease of Use3Has a minimal start-up period.Minimize start-up Time elapsed between beginning of pour and first water that enters the bucket seconds3010 Ease of Use3 Operates using only energy available naturally (gravity, human power, etc.) Doesn't need power source Binary (Yes/No)--No Economics3Filter is inexpensiveMinimize cost of filterTotal cost to produceUS $2520 Economics3 Usable by a family of 5, for 2-5 years w/out full replacement Maximize durability of filter Mean Time To Failure# of uses Economics9 Requires no consumables for operation, except for very cheap & locally available materials (salt, soap, sand, etc.) Minimize cost to maintain Annual cost to operateUS $20 Functionality9Decreases turbidityTurbidity is decreasedPercentage Decrease%>50%>75% Functionality9Decreases total suspended solids Total suspended solids decreased Percentage Decrease%>50%>75% Functionality3 Does not negatively affect the taste of the water No negative taste of water Percent of people who say water tastes the same or better %>50%>75% Safety3No hazardous releases Doesn't produce hazardous release, no chemicals added Binary (Yes/No)--No Functionality3Use Scenarios Provides enough water for family of 5, dailyFlowratelpm

Operating Costs All components will last longer than the required 2 years. Operating costs will be $0/year

Engineering Requirements CategoryScoreCustomer RequirementFunctionMetricUnitsMarginalTarget Ease of Use3Easy to clean / rechargeEasy to prepare for useTime to cleanminutes105 Ease of Use3Easy to clean / rechargeEasy to prepare for use Number of tools required for cleaning by the end user -21 Ease of Use3Lightweight for transportMinimize weight of filterWeight in lbslbs105 Ease of Use3Has a minimal start-up period.Minimize start-up Time elapsed between beginning of pour and first water that enters the bucket seconds3010 Ease of Use3 Operates using only energy available naturally (gravity, human power, etc.) Doesn't need power source Binary (Yes/No)--No Economics3Filter is inexpensiveMinimize cost of filterTotal cost to produceUS $2520 Economics3 Usable by a family of 5, for 2-5 years w/out full replacement Maximize durability of filter Mean Time To Failure# of uses Economics9 Requires no consumables for operation, except for very cheap & locally available materials (salt, soap, sand, etc.) Minimize cost to maintain Annual cost to operateUS $20 Functionality9Decreases turbidityTurbidity is decreasedPercentage Decrease%>50%>75% Functionality9Decreases total suspended solids Total suspended solids decreased Percentage Decrease%>50%>75% Functionality3 Does not negatively affect the taste of the water No negative taste of water Percent of people who say water tastes the same or better %>50%>75% Safety3No hazardous releases Doesn't produce hazardous release, no chemicals added Binary (Yes/No)--No Functionality3Use Scenarios Provides enough water for family of 5, dailyFlowratelpm

Percentage Decrease in Turbidity Pilot study: collect 30 observations of turbidity o Collect before/after, compute % difference Hypothesis test (95% confidence) on the average % difference o H 0 : µ >=.75 o H A : µ >.75 Adjustments in sample size (i.e. additional observations) may be necessary depending on the variance in the observed results If turbidity does not meet target, test at 50% for marginal success

Engineering Requirements CategoryScoreCustomer RequirementFunctionMetricUnitsMarginalTarget Ease of Use3Easy to clean / rechargeEasy to prepare for useTime to cleanminutes105 Ease of Use3Easy to clean / rechargeEasy to prepare for use Number of tools required for cleaning by the end user -21 Ease of Use3Lightweight for transportMinimize weight of filterWeight in lbslbs105 Ease of Use3Has a minimal start-up period.Minimize start-up Time elapsed between beginning of pour and first water that enters the bucket seconds3010 Ease of Use3 Operates using only energy available naturally (gravity, human power, etc.) Doesn't need power source Binary (Yes/No)--No Economics3Filter is inexpensiveMinimize cost of filterTotal cost to produceUS $2520 Economics3 Usable by a family of 5, for 2-5 years w/out full replacement Maximize durability of filter Mean Time To Failure# of uses Economics9 Requires no consumables for operation, except for very cheap & locally available materials (salt, soap, sand, etc.) Minimize cost to maintain Annual cost to operateUS $20 Functionality9Decreases turbidityTurbidity is decreasedPercentage Decrease%>50%>75% Functionality9Decreases total suspended solids Total suspended solids decreased Percentage Decrease%>50%>75% Functionality3 Does not negatively affect the taste of the water No negative taste of water Percent of people who say water tastes the same or better %>50%>75% Safety3No hazardous releases Doesn't produce hazardous release, no chemicals added Binary (Yes/No)--No Functionality3Use Scenarios Provides enough water for family of 5, dailyFlowratelpm

Percentage Decrease in Total Suspended Solids Pilot study: collect 30 observations of TSS o Collect before/after, compute % difference Hypothesis test (95% confidence) on the average % difference o H 0 : µ >=.75 o H A : µ >.75 Adjustments in sample size (i.e. additional observations) may be necessary depending on the variance in the observed results If turbidity does not meet target, test at 50% for marginal success

Engineering Requirements CategoryScoreCustomer RequirementFunctionMetricUnitsMarginalTarget Ease of Use3Easy to clean / rechargeEasy to prepare for useTime to cleanminutes105 Ease of Use3Easy to clean / rechargeEasy to prepare for use Number of tools required for cleaning by the end user -21 Ease of Use3Lightweight for transportMinimize weight of filterWeight in lbslbs105 Ease of Use3Has a minimal start-up period.Minimize start-up Time elapsed between beginning of pour and first water that enters the bucket seconds3010 Ease of Use3 Operates using only energy available naturally (gravity, human power, etc.) Doesn't need power source Binary (Yes/No)--No Economics3Filter is inexpensiveMinimize cost of filterTotal cost to produceUS $2520 Economics3 Usable by a family of 5, for 2-5 years w/out full replacement Maximize durability of filter Mean Time To Failure# of uses Economics9 Requires no consumables for operation, except for very cheap & locally available materials (salt, soap, sand, etc.) Minimize cost to maintain Annual cost to operateUS $20 Functionality9Decreases turbidityTurbidity is decreasedPercentage Decrease%>50%>75% Functionality9Decreases total suspended solids Total suspended solids decreased Percentage Decrease%>50%>75% Functionality3 Does not negatively affect the taste of the water No negative taste of water Percent of people who say water tastes the same or better %>50%>75% Safety3No hazardous releases Doesn't produce hazardous release, no chemicals added Binary (Yes/No)--No Functionality3Use Scenarios Provides enough water for family of 5, dailyFlowratelpm

Taste of Water Recruit at least 100 RIT students Have each drink tap water that has not been treated with the filter and water that has been treated by the filter (blind) Ask each student if the water tastes better, worse, or about the same Target: 75% respond with better or about the same Marginal: 50% respond with better or about the same

Engineering Requirements CategoryScoreCustomer RequirementFunctionMetricUnitsMarginalTarget Ease of Use3Easy to clean / rechargeEasy to prepare for useTime to cleanminutes105 Ease of Use3Easy to clean / rechargeEasy to prepare for use Number of tools required for cleaning by the end user -21 Ease of Use3Lightweight for transportMinimize weight of filterWeight in lbslbs105 Ease of Use3Has a minimal start-up period.Minimize start-up Time elapsed between beginning of pour and first water that enters the bucket seconds3010 Ease of Use3 Operates using only energy available naturally (gravity, human power, etc.) Doesn't need power source Binary (Yes/No)--No Economics3Filter is inexpensiveMinimize cost of filterTotal cost to produceUS $2520 Economics3 Usable by a family of 5, for 2-5 years w/out full replacement Maximize durability of filter Mean Time To Failure# of uses Economics9 Requires no consumables for operation, except for very cheap & locally available materials (salt, soap, sand, etc.) Minimize cost to maintain Annual cost to operateUS $20 Functionality9Decreases turbidityTurbidity is decreasedPercentage Decrease%>50%>75% Functionality9Decreases total suspended solids Total suspended solids decreased Percentage Decrease%>50%>75% Functionality3 Does not negatively affect the taste of the water No negative taste of water Percent of people who say water tastes the same or better %>50%>75% Safety3No hazardous releases Doesn't produce hazardous release, no chemicals added Binary (Yes/No)--No Functionality3Use Scenarios Provides enough water for family of 5, dailyFlowratelpm

Hazardous Releases Review of the design

Engineering Requirements CategoryScoreCustomer RequirementFunctionMetricUnitsMarginalTarget Ease of Use3Easy to clean / rechargeEasy to prepare for useTime to cleanminutes105 Ease of Use3Easy to clean / rechargeEasy to prepare for use Number of tools required for cleaning by the end user -21 Ease of Use3Lightweight for transportMinimize weight of filterWeight in lbslbs105 Ease of Use3Has a minimal start-up period.Minimize start-up Time elapsed between beginning of pour and first water that enters the bucket seconds3010 Ease of Use3 Operates using only energy available naturally (gravity, human power, etc.) Doesn't need power source Binary (Yes/No)--No Economics3Filter is inexpensiveMinimize cost of filterTotal cost to produceUS $2520 Economics3 Usable by a family of 5, for 2-5 years w/out full replacement Maximize durability of filter Mean Time To Failure# of uses Economics9 Requires no consumables for operation, except for very cheap & locally available materials (salt, soap, sand, etc.) Minimize cost to maintain Annual cost to operateUS $20 Functionality9Decreases turbidityTurbidity is decreasedPercentage Decrease%>50%>75% Functionality9Decreases total suspended solids Total suspended solids decreased Percentage Decrease%>50%>75% Functionality3 Does not negatively affect the taste of the water No negative taste of water Percent of people who say water tastes the same or better %>50%>75% Safety3No hazardous releases Doesn't produce hazardous release, no chemicals added Binary (Yes/No)--No Functionality3Use Scenarios Provides enough water for family of 5, dailyFlowratelpm

Flowrate Pilot study: collect 30 observations of the flow of 5 gallons of water through the filter o Collect time elapsed to filter all 5 gallons, compute flow rate in lpm Hypothesis test (95% confidence) on the flow rate o H 0 : µ >=.0394 lpm o H A : µ >.0394 lpm Adjustments in sample size (i.e. additional observations) may be necessary depending on the variance in the observed results If turbidity does not meet target, test at.6309 lpm for marginal success

Project Management

Risk Assessment

Risk Curve

Plan for MSD II

Lessons Learned

The Senior Design Process

Action Items ItemsOwnerDue Date

Thank Yous