1. Team JADS 1 The PFADS Competition Team JADS Sean McNary John Yoshimura ENGR 5 - Lab 5

2. Team JADS 2 Outline  Problem Definition  Design Process  Design Process continued  Results and Discussion  Suggested Improvements  Conclusions  Acknowledgements

3. Team JADS 3 Introduction/Background  Problem: Design PFADS for UNICEF  Parabolic Food Aid Delivery System  PFADS must deliver Food Aid Package to target location

4. Team JADS 4 Introduction/Background PYTHON-INFESTED JUNGLE BOUNDARY 4 in 4 ft 8 ft START LINE FAP TARGET SPOT 6 ft 2 in 3.5 ft 10 ft

5. Team JADS 5 Constraints  PFADS:  Weight< 10 lbs.  Length< 18 in.  Width< 18 in.  Height< 18 in.  Cost< $20.00  Built using no pre-constructed materials

6. Team JADS 6 Criteria  Hit target 10 feet away and maximize accuracy  Go over 6’ 2’’ high wall  Device launches when trigger hits barrier  Complete device must remain behind barrier  Minimize Weight(< 10 lbs.)  Minimize Volume(< 18’’x18’’x18’’)

7. Team JADS 7 Project Objectives  Design and construct a PFADS using the design process.  Practice Teamwork  Create and Give a Formal Presentation

8. Team JADS 8 Preliminary Ideas CatapultModified Catapult Rat Trap Sling-Shot

9. Team JADS 9 Refinement  Pros  Simple Release Mechanism  Weight of Launcher  Cons  Accuracy of launch  Low release angle  FAP launch distance  Total Volume of Device Catapult

10. Team JADS 10 Refinement  Pros  Large, Stable Base  Smaller Launch Arm  Simple Trigger  Weight of Launcher  Cons  FAP Launch Distance  Launch Accuracy  Launcher Volume Modified Catapult

11. Team JADS 11 Refinement  Pros  Launcher Volume  Launcher Weight  Cons  FAP Launch Distance  Launch Accuracy  Incorporating Rat Trap in Launcher  Low Launch Angle Rat Trap

12. Team JADS 12 Refinement  Pros  FAP Launch Distance  Launch Accuracy  Cons  Launcher Volume  Launcher Weight Sling-shot

13. Team JADS 13 Decision/Implementation  Designs 1-3 have similar launch mechanisms  Steep launch angle reduces power of catapult  Sling shot needed improvement to guide FAP through sling shot (Frame with Rails).  Sling Shot selected to be constructed.

14. Team JADS 14 Construction and Testing  First Design:  Weight: 9 lbs.  Height: 17.5 inches  Testing:  FAP launched over wall  PFADS flipped over wall  Problems:  High center of gravity  Rolled down ramp fast

15. Team JADS 15 Construction and Testing  Solutions  To prevent PFADS flipping over wall:  Reduced Volume and Weight of PFADS to lower center of gravity  Added brace with foam padding  Removed wheels & added skis to reduce speed

16. Team JADS 16 Final Mechanism (Side View)  Total Weight: 7 lbs.  Key Features:  PVC frame with rails to guide FAP  Metal rod unhooks gate latch to release FAP  Skis to slide down ramp  Foam Bumper  Adjustable Launch Angle

17. Team JADS 17 Results/Discussion  FAP launched straight and landed on target, but rolled away.  Trial Distances: 4’ and 3.25’  First FOM- 92.26  Second FOM- 101.63  Final Figure of Merit: 96.94  Finished 4 th

18. Team JADS 18 Results/Discussion  Advantages  Launched FAP over wall consistently  PFADS remained behind ramp barrier  Disadvantages  Weight and Volume  FAP hit target but rolled away

19. Team JADS 19 Suggested Improvements  Use Lighter Materials  Construct frame using lighter material such as aluminum  Improve Launch Angle Mechanism  Don’t use nails

20. Team JADS 20 Conclusions  Key Criteria and Constraints  Launch FAP over 6’2” wall to target with accuracy  PFADS Mechanism  Weight < 10 lbs.  Volume < 18” x 18” x 18”  Use No Pre-constructed Materials

21. Team JADS 21 Conclusions  Final Design  Used Sling-shot mechanism to launch FAP  Lighter and smaller than original design  Trigger: Metal rod pushed gate hook off an eye bolt  PFADS remained behind barrier  Launched FAP over wall consistently

22. Team JADS 22 Conclusions  Mechanism Performance  Successfully Launched During Both Trials  4’ and 3.25’  Finished in 4 th Place Total FOM- 96.94  FAP was expected to hit and stop on target  FAP actually hit target but rolled away

23. Team JADS 23 Conclusions  Improvements  Reduce weight and size of PFADS  Improve Launch Angle Mechanism  Improve accuracy by preventing FAP from rolling away from target

24. Team JADS 24 Acknowledgements Team JADS would like to thank the following individuals for their time and help:  Professor Saviz  Professor Schultz  Bob Pollard  Adrian the Machinist  ENGR 5 Introduction to Engineering Course Manual