1 / 12

Dr. Parmigiani,

Dr. Parmigiani, I thought I'd send you a message and let you know where I've ended up since college…  … As you may recall I took senior project from you a few years back and did the human powered vehicle project …

eagan-best
Download Presentation

Dr. Parmigiani,

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Dr. Parmigiani, I thought I'd send you a message and let you know where I've ended up since college…  … As you may recall I took senior project from you a few years back and did the human powered vehicle project … …Since I left I know that you've moved towards a fusing of industrial and mechanical engineering.  My experience so far supports that move as I am constantly required to think of how the parts will be made and how they will fit into to our stream of labor and lean manufacturing etc.  In a constant push to make more things faster,without sacrificing quality (and who wouldn't want that) I find myself more concerned with process improvements than product improvements and also more excited about them… Brendan Treacy Engineer @ Renovo Hardwood Bicycles ME Senior Project 2008 - 09

  2. Capstone DesignWeek 4 Lecture • Announcements (Guests) • HoQ Part 2 (Parmigiani) • Status Meeting 2 (Parmigiani) • Progress Report 2 (Parmigiani) • System Analysis / Functional Decomposition (Funk) • Requirement Verifiability (Funk) • Preliminary Proposal (Funk)

  3. House of QualityOverview • Provides a concise diagram of project requirements • Constructed in three parts in this course • Part 1: CRs & Weightings • Part 2: ERs & Targets/Tolerances • Part 3: Testing Plans & Design Links • Part 1: Done (but can be changed this term w/out petition, just get signatures) • Part 2: Next • Status meeting 2 (draft to discuss) • Progress report 2 (revised draft, hand-in for review) • Preliminary Proposal (final version, with signatures)

  4. House of QualityPart 1: Done … • Customer Requirements (CRs) • A complete listing, in the “language of the sponsor”, of what must be done • Each CR deals with one concept (e.g. don’t group “Small” and “Lightweight”) • Example: “Device must be lightweight” • One sponsor requirement may generate several CR’s (e.g. “Portable”) • Must be approved by team, sponsor mentor, faculty advisor, course instructor • Project scope defined in CR's ... pay close attention! • Weightings • Indicate relative importance of each CR (greater weighting  more important) • Total of 250 points to distribute among CRs (i.e. sum of all weightings = 250) • Example: “Device must be lightweight” given weighting of 50. • Low Technical Effort (LTE) CRs: Not given numerical weighting, but must be met. • Must be approved by team, sponsor mentor, faculty advisor, course instructor • Very important in grading Evaluation 1 and Evaluation 2 in winter term … if you now see problems, correct in Part 2 when ERs & TTs are added…

  5. Approval (print name, sign, and date): Team member 1: Faculty Advisor: Team member 2: Sponsor Mentor: Team member 3: Course Instructor: • Engineering Requirements (ERs) • Define CRs in terms of technical, measurable specifications • Generated from Customer Requirements (One CR may generate several ERs) • Ex.: CR “Device must be lightweight” maps to ER “Weighs less than 20 lb” • Used in specifying and evaluating design concepts • Must be approved by team, sponsor mentor, faculty advisor, course instructor • Ability to properly test and satisfy ERs constitutes 50% of winter term grade

  6. Approval (print name, sign, and date): Team member 1: Faculty Advisor: Team member 2: Sponsor Mentor: Team member 3: Course Instructor: • Target (w/ tolerance) • The Target is the design-to value for an ER (value to use in calculations) • The Tolerance (+/- value, <>, etc.) defines the amount of permissible variation • Example: ER “Weighs less than 20 lb” has Target “15lb”, Tolerance “<20lb” • ER satisfied if test result = target value within tolerance • Must be approved by team, sponsor mentor, faculty advisor, course instructor • Don’t use the extreme-permitted ER value as the design-to value!

  7. House of QualityExample • Original requirement from Sponsor  Portable • Customer Requirement  One person can easily carry across a room • Weighting  20 • Engineering Requirements  Weighs < 20 lbs, no sharp edges, no dimension > 12” (3 ER’s) • Target  15 lb, largest dimension of 10” • Tolerance  +5/-15 lb, +2/-10" OR < 20lb, < 12" (include units!) • Test Plan (Summary, you’ll need more detail)  1. Weigh, 2. Inspect for sharp edges, 3.Measure • Design Link (Summary, you’ll need more detail)  1. Material selection, 2. Fabrication method, 3. Component sizing

  8. House of QualityExample • Requirement from Sponsor  All control knobs labeled in English, German, and French • Customer Requirements  All control knobs labeled in English, German, and French • Weighting  LTE (Low Technical Effort) • Engineering Requirements  All control knobs labeled in English, German, and French • Target & Tolerance  N/A • Test Plan (Summary)  4. Professor from German / French depts. verifies labels meet needs • Design Link (Summary)  4. Describe how label material selection and size are appropriate

  9. House of QualityExample • Requirement from Sponsor  Water flow rate of 10 cu-in / min • Customer Requirements  Water flow rate of at least 10 in3/min within 1 sec. of activation, never a flowrate greater than 20 in3/min (2 CRs) • Weighting  30, 35 • Engineering Requirements  Flow > 10 in3/min within 1 sec, Flow < 20 in3/min (2 ERs) • Target  12 in3/min in 0.8 sec, maximum flow of 17 in3/min. • Tolerance  >10 in3/min , <1 sec, <20 in3/min • Test Plan (summary)  5. Using flow meter and timing device, measure flow rates. • Design Link (summary)  5 & 6 Describe how piping, pump, and valve selection satisfies these ERs

  10. Status Meeting 2 • Same schedule as Status Meeting 1 • Bring written draft of HoQ Part 2 • CRs & Weightings • ERs & TTs • Bring documentation (drawings, sketches, plans) of alternate designs you are considering … the results of brainstorming sessions … a which you intend to pursue Failure to conduct a satisfactory status meeting will result in a 35 point penalty

  11. Progress Report 3 Same schedule & format as Progress Report 1

  12. Discussion PointsERs from CRs • Device shall autonomously traverse a predetermined path above the vineyard • Weight distribution must be within 10% of original design • System must be self contained • Device shall not splash liquid • The device shall offer easy blade changes • Device shall be low maintenance

More Related