1. Title Slide
Notes: This presentation on GoogleDrive will be converted into PowerPoint, just like last presentation. (Jeff)

2. pictures

3. New Agenda (replace old)
*Update the Agenda from last presentation (Jeff)

4. Problem Statement/Project Overview
*same from previous presentation* (James)

5. Update the CRs from previous presentation (Jameel)
Customer Needs
Update the CRs from previous presentation (Jameel)

6. Engineering Requirements
Update the ERs from previous presentation (Jameel)

7. HOQ
Update HOQ (Jameel)

8. Functional Decomp
Chart
(Jeff)

9. Morph Chart
(Jeff)

10. Concept Options/Models
SOTM Benchmarking (James)
Benchmarking from earlier(reuse) (James)

11. SATCOM-on-the-Move Benchmarking
SATCOM-on-the-Move Benchmarking *note this gets swapped from our earlier benchmarking
General Dynamics X Band SATCOM on the Move
DRS Technologies SATCOM on the move (2 Port Cross Pol Ku-Band)
Rockwell Collins SWE-DISH SATCOM On-The-Move CCT
Frequecy Recieving
GHz
GHz
10.95 – GHz
Frequency Transmitting
GHz
GHz
13.75 – 14.5 GHz
Pedestal
2 Axis Az/El
360 Degree Azimuth Mount
Tracking Performance
FCC VMES Compliant
(< 0.20° - 99% of the
time during
Churchville B
conditions EI angle
< 80°) NA
≤ 0.1° RMS
Size
27.5" x 27.5" x 37.5"
37.5 x 27.5 x 14.5 inches
49" x 49" x 51"
Supply Voltage
28V
Power
336W cont, 1260W peak
3000W peak
Weight
182 lbs
60-85 lbs depending on options
300 lbs

12. Solution Benchmarking
*note this is the benchmarking we did in the first presentation (swap the two)

13. Selection Criteria (Generic)(partacz)
Things to Consider:
Effectiveness
Is the sub-component going to be effective at it’s intended job?
Ease of Implementation
Will the sub-component be easy to integrate into the system as a whole?
Availability
Is the sub-component frequently used in other applications?
Power Efficient
Will the sub-component draw a lot of power?
Reliability
Does the sub-component have a known history of malfunctioning?
Cost Effective
Does the sub-component fit into the given budget for the project?
Safe/Easy to Operate
Is the sub-component potential hazardous or harmful in any way? Is the sub-component easy to work with?
Weight
Does the sub-component weigh too much for the potential applications?
Size Efficient
Is the sub-component’s size too large for the potential applications?
Visual Appeal
Does the system look ‘cool’? Will it provide great demonstration material?

15. Failure models of concept (Partacz)

16. Concept Selection
Pugh Chart (quintinilla) need costing data for each choice!! (reference benchmarking)

17. Invoke Motion

18. Support The System
Need to finish this...

19. Support The Pointer

20. Power the Device

21. Receive Geo-PNT Data
Need one other thing to compare to...

22. Process Geo-PNT Signal
what do you think?

23. Direct Device

24. Point Device

25. Feasibility Analysis Process/convert/interpret signal received from Geo-PNT
Microcontroller
A microcontroller is a very portable and easy to use option. Any microcontroller that we would require for this project does not need significant power and therefore would likely be inexpensive. Most modern microcontrollers should be able to handle processing data at the rate that the Geo-PNT outputs. The Geo-PNT has conventional outputs that will easily line up with a selected microcontroller. In general, we will want to do real-world testing during good weather outside, and development testing inside so environmental factors are not of concern.
Alternate: Laptop
A laptop is easy to use and acquire as everyone on the team has one. In this regard, it is very feasible. Development work on the microcontroller will likely be able to transfer to the laptop with little to no extra work. A laptop possesses the required processing power that we need and will also be able to easily drive our motor solution. It also satisfies connection to the Geo-PNT as well as the microcontroller. A laptop will be less mobile than the microcontroller however. It will also require a bit more care. This can be achieved through the use of long connection wires while keeping the laptop inside the vehicle. An added bonus of a laptop is the ease of displaying relevant data during development and test drives.

26. Feasibility Analysis Concept Decision (see below…)
Responsible
Function
james
Process/convert/interpret signal received from Geo-PNT
ricardo
Receive data from the Geo-PNT
Transfer (send/receive) control signal
jameel
Aiming demonstration device
mayer
Invoke Motion
Calculate error margins
partacz
Support the pointer
Drive/direct device at target location
Concept Decision (see below…)
Concept Fallback Plan (Backup Plan) [Option 1 and Option 2] (Ricardo)

27. Feasibility Analysis Concept Decision (see below…)
Responsible
Function
james
Process/convert/interpret signal received from Geo-PNT
ricardo
Receive data from the Geo-PNT
Transfer (send/receive) control signal
jameel
Aiming demonstration device
mayer
Invoke Motion
Calculate error margins
partacz
Support the pointer
Drive/direct device at target location
Concept Decision (see below…)
Concept Fallback Plan (Backup Plan) [Option 1 and Option 2] (Ricardo)

28. Feasibility Analysis Concept Decision (see below…)
Responsible
Function
james
Process/convert/interpret signal received from Geo-PNT
ricardo
Receive data from the Geo-PNT
Transfer (send/receive) control signal
jameel
Aiming demonstration device
mayer
Invoke Motion
Calculate error margins
partacz
Support the pointer
Drive/direct device at target location
Concept Decision (see below…)
Concept Fallback Plan (Backup Plan) [Option 1 and Option 2] (Ricardo)

29. Feasibility Analysis Concept Decision (see below…)
Responsible
Function
james
Process/convert/interpret signal received from Geo-PNT
ricardo
Receive data from the Geo-PNT
Transfer (send/receive) control signal
jameel
Aiming demonstration device
mayer
Invoke Motion
Calculate error margins
partacz
Support the pointer
Drive/direct device at target location
Concept Decision (see below…)
Concept Fallback Plan (Backup Plan) [Option 1 and Option 2] (Ricardo)

30. Feasibility Analysis - Support Pointer (Partacz)

31. Feasibility Analysis - Support Pointer (Partacz)

32. Feasibility Analysis - Support Pointer (Partacz)

33. Feasibility Analysis Concept Decision (see below…)
Responsible
Function
james
Process/convert/interpret signal received from Geo-PNT
ricardo
Receive data from the Geo-PNT
Transfer (send/receive) control signal
jameel
Aiming demonstration device
mayer
Invoke Motion
Calculate error margins
partacz
Support the pointer
Drive/direct device at target location
Concept Decision (see below…)
Concept Fallback Plan (Backup Plan) [Option 1 and Option 2] (Ricardo)

34. Concept Decision (see below…) (ricardo)
Concept Fallback Plan (Backup Plan) [Option 1 and Option 2] (Ricardo)

35. Feasibility Analysis Concept Decision (see below…)
Responsible
Function
james
Process/convert/interpret signal received from Geo-PNT
ricardo
Receive data from the Geo-PNT
Transfer (send/receive) control signal
jameel
Aiming demonstration device
mayer
Invoke Motion
Calculate error margins
partacz
Support the pointer
Drive/direct device at target location
Concept Decision (see below…)
Concept Fallback Plan (Backup Plan) [Option 1 and Option 2] (Ricardo)

36. Option One Advantages: Extra Axis - Camera orientation control
Video of pointing data
Smaller overall system
Disadvantages
More difficult to monitor system
Extra Axis - Harder to program

37. Option Two Advantages: Obvious line of site
2 Axis - Simpler to control
Easier to monitor system
Disadvantages
Laser is less presentable
2 Axis - Camera video will not have a horizontal horizon line
Less mobile

38. Option 3: The contrast Boat as vehicle
Same specifications as before except with:
Boat as vehicle
Serial interfacing with the Geo-PNT
Satellite Dish Connections
Self-Video Production
Picture
Advantages:
Visually appealing
Good range of motion demonstration
Cost midpoint
Disadvantages:
Very difficult to implement
Severe environmental concerns
Less reliable
Less efficient in terms of reliability, size, power, and safety.
This is mostly a talk slide as we aren’t really going to develop this solution. Sell this as a brainstorming idea that is cheap but still very visually appealing. Unfortunately it isnt easy to implement and fails most of the rest of our selection criteria.
Note: see slide notes

39. System Level Design Decisions

40. Complete System PUGH Chart
Option #1
Option #2
Option #3
Effectiveness
Datum +
Ease of Implementation -
Availability
Power Efficient
Reliability
Cost Effective
Safe/Easy to Operate
Weight
Size Efficient
Visual Appeal
Overall

41. Functional Architecture
mayer

42. Draft Test Plan Preliminary test plan - high level...
Engineering Requirement
Unit of Measure
Marginal Value
Comments/Status
Test Plan (how are you going to verify satisfaction)
Accuracy and Minimum Angular Error of Attitudes Roll and Pitch
degrees
0.2
Visual Measurement based on Aiming device ability to point at specified target
Accuracy of Attitude Yaw
0.5
Position Accuracy Error Horizontal
meters
1.5
Position Accuracy Error Vertical
2.5
Position Accuracy Error Velocity
meters/sec
0.1
Accuracy of Error Over Time of Attitudes Roll and Pitch
degrees/hr 3
Time-trial Visual Measurement based on Aiming device ability to point at specified target
Accuracy of Error Over Time of Attitude Yaw
Time-trial of Visual Measurement based on Aiming device ability to point at specified target
Number of Videos per Demo
number 1
N/A
Geo-PNT is Mounted to a Mobile Object
>0
Basic Observation
Motion in Yaw
360
Range of Motion Measurement and Analysis
Motion in Pitch and Roll
180
System Functionality Continues without User Intervention
indefinate
Provide User Manual
Y/N
Provide Written and Visual Test Reports
Preliminary test plan - high level...
Leo’s TOAD [Test Observe Analyze Demonstrate] (Jameel)

43. Risk Management

44. Risk Management

45. Project Plan Mention tasks assigned to each team member (partacz)
add schedule from home computer
show entire semester schedule and
detailed schedule for next phase