DETAILED DESIGN REVIEW WEEK 15 Mara Camila Luna

DETAILED DESIGN REVIEW WEEK 15 María Camila Luna Pablo Santizo Zak Borden Zach Delurey

AGENDA Introduction � Problem statement � Finalized engineering and customer requirements Proposed process design � Functional decomposition and flow diagram � Components of the system � Proposed bill of materials Proposed assembly layout Ergonomics Risk management Team findings

EXPECTATIONS Validate final design with customer and peers Future steps (Senior Design II) � And schedule for the first 3 weeks Identify areas that need improvement Obtain customer approval for the BOM

PROBLEM STATEMENT Certain applications require smaller color targets � Complications: Forming component parts Customization requests Final target assembly Current process: Hand assembled � Improper alignment � Low yields � The objective: Redesign the manufacturing process � Lower costs � Higher yields � Improve customization ability �

CUSTOMER NEEDS CN# Importance Description CN 1 3 Color materials are spectrally accurate. CN 2 3 Individual patches are blemish free to provide accurate measurements. CN 3 3 Individual patches are aligned. CN 4 2 Durable base plate. CN 5 2 Logo of the company on the back of the plate. CN 6 3 Targets do not have burn marks or surface cracks. CN 7 1 Targets are resistant to alcohol and water. CN 8 2 Colors are easily and quickly customized. CN 9 1 Target sizes are easily customized. CN 10 1 Fast production time. CN 11 3 Low production cost. CN 12 3 Low cost system redesign. CN 13 3 High yield rates. CN 14 3 Process must be ergonomic.

ENGINEERING REQUIREMENTS Source Function Specification (Metric) Unit of Measure Marginal Value Ideal Value Testing S 1 CN 4 Base design Durability (drop test) Feet 3 ft >3 ft Drop test S 2 CN 9 Base design Target size # of sizes 3 sizes inf. Order one of each desired size S 3 CN 3 Individual patches % 5% <5% Use microscope to verify accuracy S 4 CN 5 Base design Logo is present Pass/Fail Pass Check the logo visibility S 5 CN 2/CN 6/ CN 7 Targets Percent damaged surface % 5 0 Use microscope to verify damage S 6 CN 8 Individual patches Number of patches that can be changed # 30 30 Test different paper in the laser cutter S 7 CN 8 Individual patches Time to change color scheme Min. 10 5 Time study S 8 CN 10 System Cycle time Min. 30 <15 Time study (60 trials) different users S 9 CN 11 System Production Cost Dollars 55 25 Add up the individual costs (include labor) S 10 CN 12 System Redesign Budget Dollars 1500 >1500 Add up the investment costs S 11 CN 13 System Yield Rate % 90 95 Inspect final products from the time study (n=60) Positional accuracy with respect to tile size

PROPOSED PROCESS- FLOW DIAGRAM Cut individual patches* Manufacture back plates* Place patches in bins (according to color) Place adhesive in pockets Place individual patches and base plate on static mat/ tilted table Arrange bins according to customer order Pick individual patch using vacuum pen Place patch in correct pockets using magnification device Inspect for any flaws using digital microscope * Outsourced processes

FUNCTION DECOMPOSITION Produce properly aligned, highly customizable, small scale color targets Obtain color papers Choose specific colors (customer request) Cut paper to desired size Align patches within tolerances Secure colors in place Position paper on cutter Identify pattern according to customer order Prevent patches from shifting Protect paper form cutting process Vertically and horizontally align patches Protect target from damage Check quality Inspect final product

BACK PLATE First iteration of prototypes: Material: Renshape® SL 7820 black resin � Quantity: 10 small, 5 large � Overall length � 0. 495” Small target 0. 850” Large target � Depth of pockets= 0. 01” Feasibility of 3 D printing Pocket allows for self-aligning Pockets were not deep enough Pockets and patches size did not match

BACK PLATE (CONT. )

BACK PLATE (CONT. ) Second Iteration Prototypes: PLATE A B C D W Pocket width Rib width Total thickness Pocket depth Wall thickenss 1 0. 0625” 0. 010” 0. 0625” 0. 020” 0. 025” 2 (gutters) 0. 0625” 0. 010” 0. 0938” 0. 020” 0. 025” 3 0. 0554 0. 010” 0. 0625” 0. 015”. 030” 0. 029” 4 0. 050” 0. 015” 0. 0625” 0. 015”. 030” 0. 032” 5 0. 115” 0. 010” 0. 0625” 0. 015”. 030” 0. 036” 6 0. 100” 0. 025” 0. 0625” 0. 015”. 030” 0. 044”

COLOR PATCHES Laser cutter process outsourced Test the different samples given by customer � Small variability � 0. 056” Small target � 0. 196” Large target Customer wants to keep working with current employee Possible back-up plan: Boston Laser Cutter

VACUUM PEN Problems identified earlier and potential solution: � Picks up more than one tile � Tile flips when dropped into the pocket � Learning curve Ergonomics expert opinion: � Vibration is not a problem � Sound is not a problem

ADHESIVE Spray Adhesive � Scotch: Photo Mount 5 minutes curing time Dry clear � Krylon : High strength 30 minutes curing time Does not dry clear Not a feasible solution Liquid Adhesive � Gorilla superglue Long curing time Dry clear No test for reflectance available Increases cycle time Tested by the costumer 2 1 3

TEST FOR COLOR REFLECTANCE (SCOTCH PHOTO MOUNTING) First set of experiments: � Individual patch placed immediately after spraying the adhesive � Delta E on the yellow patch 2. 2 visible difference 100 90 80 70 60 50 2 Yellow no glue 40 5 Yellow glue 30 10 Yellow glue 3 days 20 WAVE LENGTH (nm) 740 720 700 680 660 640 620 600 580 560 540 520 500 480 460 440 420 400 0 380 10 360 REFLECTANCE (%)

TEST FOR COLOR REFLECTANCE (SCOTCH PHOTO MOUNTING) New application process � Wait Delta E decreased from 2. 2 to 0. 1 � 0. 1 (no visible change) 100 90 80 70 60 50 Yellow no glue 40 Yellow glue 5 min 30 20 WAVELENGTH (nm) 740 720 700 680 660 640 620 600 580 560 540 520 500 480 460 440 420 0 400 10 380 REFLECTANCE (%) 1: 30 min. after spraying the adhesive 360

ADDITIONAL TESTING In order to test the actual curing time a small target was sprayed � The tester waited 8 minutes and then start placing the individual patches � After all the patches were placed the target was dropped form 3 ft in order to test the adhesive quality � All of the patches stayed in place

STATIC MAT & TURNING TILTED PLATE Static Mat: � Help to keep the individual patches before they are placed in the target Tilted Plate: � Table rotates and tilts to ease the placement of the patches Ergonomic improvement: Helps to improve the position of the user � Non-skid surface to hold the plate and reduce the necessity of two hands handling

BINS Keep the individual patches separated by color and sizes Increase the organization of the layout � Reduces the preparation time 2 different Bins � 64 drawers � 39 drawers

MAGNIFICATION DEVICE Customer ordered a set of professional magnifying lenses � Allows for people with corrective lenses � Reduces the problem of going into and out of the magnification range � Reduces ergonomic problems � Comfortable for the user

DIGITAL MICROSCOPE Inspection/quality purposes � Measurement software � Increase quality control � Reduces time Not for alignment purposes: � Difficult of use (working in one are while looking at another)

BILL OF MATERIALS Part Name Part No. Size Price Color patches N/A 1/8, 1/16” N/A Back plate N/A 0. 69* 0. 81” , 0. 44*0. 38” $10. 00 Vacuum pen & accessories V 8100 A 3*3*6” $499. 00 Photo mount spray adhesive B 001680 QHW 4. 25 Ounce $13. 18 Bins 10164/ HA 01039001 20*16*6 ½” /19. 5*15. 8*6. 2” $30. 14/$31. 72 Tilting turntable B 000674 S 4 Q 7 ¾” $61. 40 Magnification lenses Provided by Customer $1300 Digital microscope Provided by Customer $1100 Static mat Provided by Customer $850

ASSEMBLY LAYOUT

ERGONOMICS Main problem: posture and length of the task Sound and vibration are not issues Early to make a decision � First pick a design � Then consider ergonomic issues Consider inexpensive solutions � Turning table instead of whole table � Inexpensive microscope/ magnification device

RISK MANAGEMENT Link to updated risk management New Risks � Adhesive fails over time � Original Sized parts make patches too small to cut � Gutters cause structural weakness

PLANS FOR SENIOR DESIGN II Review project state � Costumer and engineer requirements with costumer Inventory of hardware and parts Review long term adhesive test Select adhesive and method Test prototypes � Varying depths and wall sizes Update customer with results Create optimized back plate Trial run process � Ergonomic or other issues

LESSONS LEARNED Include several test variables on prototypes Previously plan for the next steps following an experiment Keep organized notes for every meeting Adapt to changes in scope and initial conditions Importance of risk management Continuous process

Questions?