TDJ4M_ISU

include component="page" wikiName="jmcintyre" page="course_tabs_header" include component="page" wikiName="jmcintyre" page="menu_TDJ4M_crumbs" =Independent Study Unit - Mechanical or Industrial Design=

You will spend the next 8 class periods (and an expected minimum of 12h outside of class) on an industrial design or mechanical engineering problem. To solve this problem you are to research possible solutions, designing and prototyping those solutions and finally modeling the solution in scale.

=Industrial Design= 

1. Who will buy your product?
You must make sure that there is a market for your new product, and that it is not ‘a solution looking for a problem’. To do this, protect your idea (see 5) and then discuss it with your personal contacts and people involved in the industry that your product is relevant to.

2. How many potential customers are there?
First, you need to find out the total size of the market that might buy your product (cyclists, plumbers, whatever). Then, you need to estimate the percentage of that market that might be interested in your product. Finding out the number of sales for similar products can help make the figures more realistic.

3. Who will you be competing with?
All products have competitors. Thoroughly examine yours, both the obvious ones and those that provide a similar solution to the problem that you are trying to address. When you have done that, work out the strengths and weaknesses of your new product compared to the competition and look for the areas of competitive advantage. This will lead on to asking…

4. What will make your product the best choice?
You will need to identify clear benefits or qualities that differentiate your product from the competition. Examples of positive differentiators are better appearance, higher quality, ease of use, durability and environmental benefits. Avoid using low cost as the only means of differentiation – it just makes your business look cheap. Go on Wikipedia and search for ‘product differentiation’ for more information on this topic.

5. Can your product idea be protected?
Making sure your idea is protected is essential. During your initial discussions, you can prepare a Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) that binds the signatories to keep your ideas secret. You can then explore patents and design registration. Be aware that good patent advice and searches can cost several thousand pounds.

6. Which standards will your product need to meet?
All products sold in the EU need to be CE marked, and some must comply with stringent safety, environmental and performance criteria. Some of these involve detailed testing routines that have to be carried out on prototype parts by specialists. The British Standards website is a good starting point to see which standards will apply to your product.

7. How will your product be manufactured and sold?
Will you make the product yourself or will you sub-contract production to someone in the UK or Asia? How much are you prepared to investing tooling and production set-up? Will you sell the product direct to the public, sell through retail outlets, or sell the idea to another company? These issues need to be considered at the outset, as they will have a significant impact on commercial success.

8. How much will all this cost?
In addition to patent advice (see 5), the design and development of a product, including the data needed for manufacture, can cost anywhere from several thousand to many tens of thousands of pounds. Prototyping and testing to meet standards, etc., can also cost several thousand pounds. Production tooling for a simple one piece moulding may be a couple of thousand pounds, whilst a large complex product may cost hundreds of thousands to tool up for. Promotion and marketing also requires significant investment if it is to be effective. The important thing to recognize is that very few products can be developed, produced and launched for less than a six figure sum.

9. How will you pay for it?
If your funds are limited, it is essential to phase the work so that your risks are minimized. The first phase will be protecting your intellectual property. The second phase will be developing a ‘proof of concept’ model that you can use to demonstrate your basic idea. You should be prepared to spend several thousand pounds to achieve this. With this model and a good plan (see below) you will then be able to approach investors to gain funding for full commercial development.

10. Do you have a plan?
All the issues above – and other essentials like how you will survive financially while you are working on your idea – need to be written up in to a detailed business plan. This will make your business idea more credible to investors, but will also enable you to minimize your risks.

= INDUSTRIAL DESIGN= =Assignment # 7 - [|Sears DX high school competition] or other ones ([|Velux] or this one [|House in a Forest])=

Task:
You are to research and innovate a re-imagined design challenge choice found in the brief at the DX website ([|PDF link to the various competition categories]). You are to look at all questions normally identified with the research then come up with sketches going from emotional concept, to thumbnail, to detailed sketches with pullouts. Then you are to enter a modeling program of your choice (I would recommend Sketchup as it's free) and make a 3D model, as well as elevations (likely in AutoCAD) including relevant detail, dimensions and pullouts. If you want to make more realistic 3D models, then you may want to sign up for and download [|AutoDesk Inventor](they make AutoCAD) which is free for 16 months for students. Finally, you are to come up with a scale model of your product. It can be made from clay, wood, styrofoam or whatever you want. The model need not be functional or made from the industrial materials as it would be if it was full-sized. But it should look as close to your imagined finished product as you can make it. The scale depends on your project.

NOTE: While you need not get into excruciating details in your project, it is important to paint your ideas with a relatively detailed brush. For example, while you may not demonstrate how the fasteners are grafted into the bike helmet, but, you should show the general flow of how the fasteners would wrap around the subject's head. That is to say - show how things will work without necessarily knowing how to get the finicky details sorted out about how metal pieces get welded, or electrical connections are made etc... **For the purposes of the competition, it is VITALLY IMPORTANT that you ensure you document every step along the way including notes and photos.**

Best yet - this assignment pulls double-duty. Not only is it a good project for ID, it is also a national competition. It will get your name out there but also get you some prizes. All entries must be submitted by no later than May 1st in order to be evaluated for the competition.
 * [|Registration form] (PDF)
 * [|Design ideas and background information]

Evaluation:

 * Before construction begins - paper sketches must be assessed by me to ensure the project is doable and you've thought through the details.
 * Because so much of this project will be done outside of class hours, ensure you keep up to date on hours and tasks accomplished at home with **[[file:Log Sheet 1.doc|THIS LOGSHEET]]**
 * After completion, **sketches**, a **final elevations (CAD or hand-drafted)** a **3D model** and a **scale model** will be submitted with the **product design report**.
 * in your product design report include all sketches, elevations and 3D models you have created. Think of the product design report as a 1-2 page document like the technical reports you have done in the past for design classes. Make sure you have addressed the ID questions in your research into the product.

The classroom evaluation of the assignment will be as follows: - material/product/market research /4 - solutions and design notes /4 - /4 ||
 * **Component** || **Value** ||
 * 1 - Product Design Report || 12
 * 2 - sketches || 4 ||
 * 3 - elevations with details || 4 ||
 * 4 - 3D model || 4 ||
 * 5- scale model || 4 ||


 * **CATEGORY** || **4** || **3** || **2** || **1** ||
 * **Sketches** || Drawings are flawless - pullouts (notes) include relevant design details || Drawings are well done, pullouts are included. Mostly all details are addressed. || Generally the drawings convey the design plans. There are several design elements missing. || Many design elements are missing from the documents, but overall the design can be understood. ||
 * **Elevations** || Relevant views of the product are clear. Details can be seen and appreciated. Every aspect of the elevation is clear and obvious. || All views are present, though there may be slight confusion in the drawings || Generally the drawings can lead towards a final product, but there are flaws in which construction details may be obscured || There are large errors in the object views - such that construction will be difficult based on the elevations. ||
 * **3D model** || Model is flawless - pullouts include relevant design details || Model is well done, pullouts are included. Mostly all details are addressed. Mostly all notes/finishes are present || Generally the model conveys the design plans. There are several design elements missing. || Many design elements are missing from the model, but overall the design can be visualized. ||
 * **Scale model** || Construction of the product is superior. All joints and cuts are careful and deliberate. Product is stylistically superior. || Construction is sound. Cuts and joints may not all be perfect. Product is generally pleasant to look at. || Generally the construction is solid. Cuts and joints as well as style all leave something to be desired. || The construction is weak. Joints and or cuts are mismatched which results in a stylistically inferior product. ||
 * **Technical Report**
 * - applies to all aspects of the report** || All aspects of the category are present and exemplary || All aspects of the category are present, though may require some work || There are aspects of the category that are missing and work is required || There are many flaws in the category submission. ||
 * **Use of Time** || Time is very well used and documented as shown by observation by teacher, and documentation of progress in journal with no reminders. || Generally time was very well used as shown by observation by teacher, and documentation of progress in journal with few reminders or missing time-planning. || Used time well as shown by observation by teacher and documentation of progress in journal, but required reminders on one or more occasions to do so and/or lacked documentation of time spent outside of class. || Used time poorly (as shown by observation by teacher and/or documentation of progress in journal) in spite of several reminders to do so and/or lack of documentation outside of class. ||

=Mechanical Engineering=

**Assignment #7 - Trebu-tacular!**

You are to create, in miniature, a fully functional trebuchet that is capable of launching a 100g weight no less than 1m distance. The goal is two part:


 * 1) See who can propel the 100g weight the furthest
 * 2) See who can be most accurate in hitting a target

Description:
The counterweight trebuchet appeared in both Christian and Muslim lands around the Mediterranean in the twelfth century (though was likely developed some 700 years earlier in China). It could fling projectiles of up to three hundred and fifty pounds (140 kg) at high speeds into enemy fortifications. This created a far more formidable siege engine than the catapult which was limited in both range and durability.

General Rules:
The trebuchet can be no taller from ground to the pivot point where the arm passes through of 30 cm. The arm itself can be no longer than 70 cm.The goals are to make both a robust design that is capable of launching a 100g mass as far as possible, but also to be able to be accurate for the second portion of the competition (given a couple of tries). In order to qualify for competition points, the 100g mass must launch no less than 1m from the trebuchet's arm's pivot point.

All contestants are expected to follow the engineering rule of ethics (no cheating). Failure to comply will result in forfeiture of a grade.

Materials:
You are to use scaled 1:6 2"x6" cedar for the structure for this competition. Any other pieces must be supplied from home, but be subject beforehand to approval by me. No part of the trebuchet may be bought from parts especially designed for such activity. Wood glue will be the adhesive used to glue members of wood to each other. Allow a 24h cure time between the last stages of construction and the test date.

Testing:
__**1) Distance**__

You will attempt to launch a 100g mass as far as possible using your trebuchet. No interaction may be made with the device after you trigger it to release. The mass will only be able to be launched from the inertia given to it by the falling counterweight.

__**2) Accuracy**__

You will attempt to launch a 100g mass exactly 2.5 m away (at the opponent if there is one) from the pivot arm of the trebuchet. You will get 3 attempts to do so (or if there are 2+ competitors you get a random chance to go first). The average of the distance away from the 2.5 m mark will be taken as the competition entry.

Helpful Calculations
A very simple model found online just uses the mass of the projectile (m2), the mass of the counter weight (m1), and the height the counter weight falls (h):

Range (max) = 2 * (m1/m2) * h

Now the efficiency of the trebuchet will cause this model to be off by quite a bit. But once you have a working trebuchet, we find this model works well when we vary m1, m2, or h. We assume we have a take off angle of 45 degrees above the horizon. This solution is based on the classic max range ballistics problem - 45 degree take off angle. It also assumes converting all the potential energy of the counter weight to kinetic energy of the projectile. That is why the efficiency issue comes up as a lot of energy is lost due to friction in the moving trebuchet. If the projectile spins a lot then it will travel a shorter distance as the potential energy is split into kinetic and rotational energy. Projectile shape and wind will also vary the results.

Evaluation:

 * Before construction begins - paper sketches, and a 3D Sketchup model must be submitted for assessment. After completion, sketches, a final CAD file and a 3D model will be submitted with the design report. The Sketchup model will include all relevant details as pullouts.
 * From the isometric sketch, you are to create front and side views as well as top view of your trebuchet in AutoCAD. You will use these in guiding your construction.
 * Trebuchet construction - overall design of the finished product will be evaluated including: dimensions, style and adherence to the working drawings.
 * Distance results
 * Accuracy results
 * Self-Evaluation/ write-up.

General value of various components of the project:
 * Component || Value ||
 * 1 - sketches and 3D model || 4 ||
 * 2 - AutoCAD files || 4 ||
 * 3 - Trebuchet construction || 8 ||
 * 4 - Trebuchet distance result || % of 10 ||
 * 5- Trebuchet accuracy result || % of 10 ||


 * **CATEGORY** || **4** || **3** || **2** || **1** ||
 * **sketches and 3D model** || Dawings and model are flawless - pullouts (notes) include relevant design details || Drawings and model are good, pullouts are included. Mostly all details are addressed. || Generally the drawing and model conveys design plans. There are several design elements missing. || Many design elements are missing from the drawing or the model, but overall the design can be understood. ||
 * **AutoCAD File** || Relevant views of the there are clear || All views are present, though there may be confusion in the drawings || Generally the drawings can lead towards a final product, but there are flaws in which construction details may be obscured || There are large errors in the object views - such that construction will be difficult based on the schematics. ||
 * **Trebuchet construction** || Construction of the product is superior. All joints and cuts are careful and deliberate. Product is stylistically superior. || Construction is sound. Cuts and joints may not all be perfect. Product is generally pleasant to look at. || Generally the construction is solid. Cuts and joints as well as style all leave something to be desired. || The construction is weak. Joints and or cuts are mismatched which results in a stylistically inferior product. ||
 * **Use of Time** || Used time well during each class period (as shown by observation by teacher, and documentation of progress in journal) with no reminders. || Used time well during most class periods (as shown by observation by teacher, and documentation of progress in journal) with no reminders. || Used time well (as shown by observation by teacher and documentation of progress in journal), but required reminders on one or more occasions to do so. || Used time poorly (as shown by observation by teacher and/or documentation of progress in journal) in spite of several reminders to do so. ||


 * Assignment #7 - Freebird Plane Challenge **

You are to design, build and test a plane that is to be launched, travel a distance of 6m, turn at an angle of 45 degrees, then land 2m later in a "landing strip" (bull's eye).

Description:
Students are to design a plane made of materials of their choice. This plane is to travel a distance of 6m forward THEN turn 45 degrees and land 2 m further on in a 1m diameter bull's-eye on the ground whose center is at the 2m mark.

General Rules:

 * No plane-specific items may be used in the construction of the plane
 * Any and all adhesives are permitted
 * The only method of propulsion is the elastic launching the device off of the launcher.
 * The angle of launch is up to person/group.
 * No interaction may be made with the plane once it is launched

All contestants are expected to follow the engineering rule of ethics (no cheating). Failure to comply will result in forfeiture of a grade.

Materials:

 * Individuals/teams will be supplied 2 pieces of balsa wood.

Helpful Calculations
[|Here is a calculator] at NASA that helps with glider lift/propulsion measurements and predictions.

Evaluation:
General value of various components of the project:
 * Component || Value ||
 * 1 - sketches and 3D model || 4 ||
 * 2 - AutoCAD files || 4 ||
 * 3 - Plane construction || 8 ||
 * 4 - Plane distance result ||  ||
 * 5 - Plane accuracy result ||  ||
 * 6 -Technical Report || 6 ||

//6-(5)4-(3)2-1// || All aspects of the report are present and exemplary || All aspects of the report are present, though may require some work || There are aspects missing and work is required || There are many flaws in the report ||
 * **CATEGORY** || **4** || **3** || **2** || **1** ||
 * **sketches and 3D model** || Dawings and model are flawless - pullouts (notes) include relevant design details || Drawings and model are good, pullouts are included. Mostly all details are addressed. || Generally the drawing and model conveys design plans. There are several design elements missing. || Many design elements are missing from the drawing or the model, but overall the design can be understood. ||
 * **AutoCAD File** || Relevant views of the there are clear || All views are present, though there may be confusion in the drawings || Generally the drawings can lead towards a final product, but there are flaws in which construction details may be obscured || There are large errors in the object views - such that construction will be difficult based on the schematics. ||
 * **Trebuchet construction**
 * (double value)** || Construction of the product is superior. All joints and cuts are careful and deliberate. Product is stylistically superior. || Construction is sound. Cuts and joints may not all be perfect. Product is generally pleasant to look at. || Generally the construction is solid. Cuts and joints as well as style all leave something to be desired. || The construction is weak. Joints and or cuts are mismatched which results in a stylistically inferior product. ||
 * **Technical Report**
 * **Use of Time** || Used time well during each class period (as shown by observation by teacher, and documentation of progress in journal) with no reminders. || Used time well during most class periods (as shown by observation by teacher, and documentation of progress in journal) with no reminders. || Used time well (as shown by observation by teacher and documentation of progress in journal), but required reminders on one or more occasions to do so. || Used time poorly (as shown by observation by teacher and/or documentation of progress in journal) in spite of several reminders to do so. ||