Slide 1

Detailed Design Phase Review: P14415 Patrick Morabito John Wilson Michael Coffey Nathan Conklin Samuel Svintozelsky

Slide 2

Agenda Requirements Review Prior Design 1 Design 1 Design 2 Test Plan Risks Moving Forward

Slide 3

Customer Requirements

Slide 4

Engineering Requirements

Slide 5

Functional Decomposition Upper Level

Slide 6

Functional Decomposition Mid Level

Slide 7

Functional Decomposition Mid Level

Slide 8

Functional Decomposition Mid Level

Slide 9

Functional Decomposition Mid Level

Slide 10

Functional Decomposition Sub System level

Slide 11

Design 1 - Prior Design Iteration Overly Conservative Analysis Model Failed Worst Case Loading (6180psi): +150% of Ultimate Strength (4100psi) Value too high to justify moving forward (Arrows denote failure location)

Slide 12

Design 1 - Manufacturing Process Full production and prototype tooling costs for large dimension (32in x 32in) base too expensive to proceed. Prototype costs range in the $8,000 + range Full production run costs for lots of 100 = $50.00 o still relatively large for simplicity of part Have contacted Faro Industries for additional vacuum forming support. Possibility to re- quote prototype using wooden mold. *Discussed in more detail later in powerpoint Wooden mold for large dimension part could cost ~ $3,000

Slide 13

Design 1 - Vacuum forming at R.I.T

Slide 14

Design 1 - Plastic Material Selection Material Selected: HDPE Acrylic: Brittle Polycarbonate: Expensive relative to HDPE (2x the cost for most sheets) ABS: Poor UV resistance

Slide 15

Design 1 - Selected Design

Slide 16

Design 1 -Assembly Drawing

Slide 17

Design 1 -Lid Assembly Drawing

Slide 18

Design 1 - Mold

Slide 19

Design 1 -Mold Drawing

Slide 20

Design 1 -Mold Assembly Drawing

Slide 21

Design 1 - Rebar Design

Slide 22

Slide 23

Design 1 - Rebar Length Optimization

Slide 24

Slide 25

Design 1 - Proof of CR/ER Overview

Slide 26

Design 1 - Proof of CR/ER: Strength (Insert link to detailed calculations here?) 29600 Cycles => ~3.86 years (Family of 7, 3 times per day, 365 days a year)

Slide 27

Design 1 - Analysis Assumptions Rebar supported by edge of hole Load applied across 4in diameter circle Modified Goodman Failure Theory Rebar is hot-rolled

Slide 28

Design 1 - Ansys Analysis - Stress 270lbs

Slide 29

Design 1 - Ansys Analysis - Displacement 270lbs

Slide 30

Design 1 - Ansys Analysis - Stress 120lbs

Slide 31

Design 1 - Ansys Analysis - Displacement 120lbs

Slide 32

Design 1 - Ansys Analysis - Stress 270lbs

Slide 33

Design 1 - Ansys Analysis - Displacement 270lbs

Slide 34

Design 1 - Analysis Summary Average Loading (120lbs): Infinite Life & No Yield High Loading (270lbs): Finite Life (29600 cycles) & No Yield; 3.86 years Largest Unsupported Plastic Section Wont Fail Actual Design Stronger: Loading Distributed by Plastic & Ribbing

Slide 35

Design 1 - Proof of CR/ER: Dimensional

Slide 36

(.61m)

Slide 37

Design 1 - Proof of CR/ER: Dimensional (.23m) (.15m)

Slide 38

Design 1 - Proof of CR/ER: Costs

Slide 39

Design 1 - Cost Breakdown: Shipping Assumptions: -One day storage before loading and after unloading (2 days total) -Weight does not affect shipping cost -Arborloo will be assembled in Haiti (i.e. only raw material is shipped) Cost to ship: 20 Shipping Container Dimensions:

Slide 40

Design 1 - Cost Breakdown Cont. Material Cost: Shipping Cost: Labor Cost:

Slide 41

Design 1 - Proof of CR/ER: Weight

Slide 42

Design 1 - Proof of CR/ER: Assembly Finished Purchased Product: Does not require on-site assembly On-site installation requires the removal of surrounding surface to allow the product to sit in the ground No complex tools required at use location

Slide 43

Design 1 - Estimated Process Time Approximately 66 minutes

Slide 44

Design 1 - Proof of CR/ER: Static coefficient of friction

Slide 45

Design 1 - Proof of CR/ER: Misc Ease of Cleaning: Detachable lid, non porous material, lightweight dumpable design, smooth surface Aesthetically Pleasing: Pending focus group review

Slide 46

Design 1 - Additional Customer Requirement: Possible Shelter Attachment

Slide 47

Design 1 - Summary Cost in lots of 1000: $23.86 Weight per base: 22.2lbs Infinite life for rebar at average load (120lbs) 3.86 years for rebar at high load (270lbs)

Slide 48

Design 2: Deck-Loo - Overview Design Advantages Robust material Designed for use outdoor Designed as walking surface Simple Construction Pre cut pieces can be assembled with screws alone Lightweight Design 22.9 lbs

Slide 49

Design 2 - Material Selection 100% Recycled High Density Polyethylene High Ultimate Strength Excellent environmental stress crack resistance High Ductility

Slide 50

Design 2 - Manufacturing Process Delivery of Kitted plastic lumber to village craftsman Assembled by screwing lumber together Purchased in village and carried to use sight fully assembled

Slide 51

Design 2 - Prototype

Slide 52

Design 2 - Proof of CR/ER Overview

Slide 53

Main Concern is deflection Deflection between supports Deflection of supports What is comfortable?

Slide 54

Design 2 - Proof of CR/ER Overview Deflection between supports Deflection of Supports

Slide 55

Design 2 - Proof of CR/ER Overview This analysis is conservative because of point load assumption, so deflection should be less Based on current Haitian sanitation solutions, the team agrees this deflection is sufficient. However, we have ordered more supports than needed, so we can adjust if necessary

Slide 56

Design 2 - Proof of CR/ER Overview

Slide 57

Slide 58

Slide 59

Slide 60

Design 2 - Cost Breakdown: Shipping Assumptions: -One day storage before loading and after unloading (2 days total) -Weight does not affect shipping cost -Arborloo will be assembled in Haiti (i.e. only raw material is shipped) Cost to ship: 20 Shipping Container Dimensions:

Slide 61

Design 2 - Cost Breakdown Cont. Material Cost: Shipping Cost: Labor Cost:

Slide 62

Design 2 - Summary Cost in lots of 1000: $40.86 Weight per base: 22.9lbs Worst case deflection:.44in Simple Construction

Slide 63

Test Plan

Slide 64

Slide 65

Highlighted Risks Risks 1.Not adoptable: high cost 1.Prototype fails tests 1.Unable to manufacture in Haiti 1.Unacceptable deflection Mitigation Strategy 1.Optimize cost through iteration 2.Modify design accordingly 1.Manufacture in the US 1.Increase the number/material of ribs

Slide 66

Limitations On campus manufacturability: machine may be unable to form 1/4in sheets Advanced deadlines in MSDII Mold making capabilities Shipping capabilities

Slide 67

Future Project Recommendations Reiterate with only vacuum formed plastic, without any added supports o Work with Faro Industries Reiterate with a focus on recycled materials

Slide 68

Future MSD Recommendations Less lecture content early on and more work time 15 minutes for Subject Matter Expert meetings is much too short

Slide 69

Learning Experience Importance of project planning and documentation Iterative design process

Slide 70

MSDII Critical Path and Milestones

Slide 71

Moving Forward Tasks Determine mold making capabilities Order raw materials Manufacture mold Assemble Prototypes

Slide 72

Acknowledgements A big thank you to Sarah, Pedro, Kevin, Johnny, Dr. Thorn, Dr. Lam, Dr. Debartolo, and Dr. Boedo, Dr. Humphrey, and all other parties that have assisted us

Slide 73

Questions?