Flipper Fishy Fun Fig 0 Flipper Fishy Fun

  • Slides: 24
Download presentation
Flipper Fishy Fun Fig. 0. Flipper Fishy Fun Model EDSGN 100 - 018 |

Flipper Fishy Fun Fig. 0. Flipper Fishy Fun Model EDSGN 100 - 018 | Group 7 By: Kaelan Freund, Nicole Moore, Michelle Mydlow, and Jackie Luong

Table of contents 1. Mission statement 2. Design Specifications a. Stakeholders b. Target Audience

Table of contents 1. Mission statement 2. Design Specifications a. Stakeholders b. Target Audience c. Requirements, functionality, and constraints 3. Concept a. Brainstorming b. Analysis c. selection 4. Prototype a. Subsystem design b. Materials c. Calculations d. Cost e. Construction 5. Conclusion

Mission Statement We took an opportunity to design, test, and market a gadget that

Mission Statement We took an opportunity to design, test, and market a gadget that optimizes materials and prices to allow aquatic activity enthusiasts to navigate on calm bodies of water by means of an independent bipedal motion.

TARGET AUDIENCE PROPOSALS: Stakeholders - Our design group - EDSGN class - Dr. Colledge

TARGET AUDIENCE PROPOSALS: Stakeholders - Our design group - EDSGN class - Dr. Colledge - Material distributors (Lowes, Home Hardware) - Transporters - Workshop supervisor in Hammond Building - Potential customers - Users of the prototype - Angel investors - Trash men - Landfill owners - Safety/ environmental regulators - Life guards - Owners of bodies of waters in which we use Table 1. Stakeholders High Schoolers: Fast - but not stable walking speed- “nothing too krazay” Fishing Playing around sports Skill oriented - learned Price: $100, $300, $500, $1000, $1500 Take away Interest @ 75% Lived on Sail Boats: High control Stay dry on salt water Easily fixable - intuitive design Recreational users: Paddleboard Surfing Water bike Kayaks Both personal and public device Children: - Safety - stability Light enough for a kid to carry Pretend to be a superhero Racing $30, depend on product College Students: Interest 85 -90% Boating Learned skill type thing Use with friends Rent out Outside activity Novel activity Paddle. Board sort of thing Medium to big is definitely fine Still relatively portable Potential for high control/speed Actual Target Audience Recreational users: Requirements: Paddleboard Surfing Water bike Kayaks Both personal and public device Be able to hold up to 250 lbs on water Be height and weight adjustable Be able to fit any size foot comfortably Cross 25 m on water without falling over Functionality: Easily retrieved once felled Be able to move at at least walking speed Directionally controllable Simple construction Hands free usability Constraints: Under 75 lbs

We interpreted the customer needs and quantified the project specifications to create a clear

We interpreted the customer needs and quantified the project specifications to create a clear problem space Customer Wants: Specifications: Light weight - Weight must not exceed 50 lbs The device is able to be moved to the edge of the pool from inside the water while not in use Compact/ Portable - Able to breakdown into a maxim of 5 pieces and stored in a 4 ftx 4 ft space without the use of tools Fast - Be able to travel a minimum of 1. 5 m/s Stable - Have a center of mass within 1. 5 ft-2. 5 ft away from the edge Ability to adjust to different sizes and weights of users Masterable - A user must be able to feel 25% more comfortable on the device over the course of 5 one hour sessions on the device based on a survey of 20 users Must be able to be used without one’s hands 50% of the time Control - A user is able to turn in a circle on the water in a 2 m radius Affordable - Wholesale price is less than $150 with a profit of $70 Safe - Less than 5% injury (injury defined by broken skin, broken bone, and/or strained muscle) when used for more than 3 total hours Table 2. Specifications

Role Assignment s: Finance: Nicole Materials: Michelle Building: - Base construction: - Finishing touches:

Role Assignment s: Finance: Nicole Materials: Michelle Building: - Base construction: - Finishing touches: Jackie and Kaelan Michelle and Nicole - Motor function construction: CAD Design: Design Sketch: Table 3. Role Assignments Jackie and Kaelan Jackie

Concept Generation/Brainstorming Fig. 1. Walker Fig. 2. Tsunami Circle Fig. 4. Flipper Fishy Fun

Concept Generation/Brainstorming Fig. 1. Walker Fig. 2. Tsunami Circle Fig. 4. Flipper Fishy Fun Fig. 3. Sea Sandals Fig. 5. Elliptical

Fig. 6. 1. Aqua. Runner Fig. 6. 3. Fig. 6. 2. Fig. 6. 4.

Fig. 6. 1. Aqua. Runner Fig. 6. 3. Fig. 6. 2. Fig. 6. 4.

We used a Specs Comparison of Importance to determine which specs had the most

We used a Specs Comparison of Importance to determine which specs had the most weight on our design. Table 4. Specification Comparison Specs A B C D E F G H row totals % importance Weight A A 1 1/4 1/2 5 1/3 2 1 10. 083 8. 59 compactability B B 4 1 1/2 5 2 1/3 2 3 17. 833 15. 20 speed C C 2 2 1 1/2 3 12 10. 23 stability D D 1/5 1/2 1 1/5 1/4 1/8 1 3. 475 2. 96 masterability E E 3 1/2 1 5 1 1/2 4 15. 5 13. 21 control F F 3 3 2 4 2 1 1/3 2 17. 33 14. 77 affordability G G 1/2 2 8 2 3 1 8 25 21. 31 safety H H 1 1/3 1/2 1/8 1 16. 167 13. 78 Total: 117. 338 Intensity of Importance 1 3 5 moderately more much more Equally important 7 9 2, 4, 6, 8 extremely important top priority intermediate values 1 1/4

Concept Comparison Criteria 6 is best Tsunami Circle weight rating Elliptical Flipper Fishy Fun

Concept Comparison Criteria 6 is best Tsunami Circle weight rating Elliptical Flipper Fishy Fun Walker weighted score rating Aquarunner 90385 weighted score rating Sea Sandals weighted score rating weighted score Weight 8. 59 3 25. 77 2 17. 18 4 34. 36 5 42. 95 1 8. 59 6 51. 54 compactability 15. 2 4 60. 8 2 30. 4 3 45. 6 5 76 1 15. 2 6 91. 2 10. 23 4 40. 92 2 20. 46 4 40. 92 3 30. 69 1 10. 23 2. 96 2 5. 92 4 11. 84 1 2. 96 6 17. 76 masterability 13. 21 3 39. 63 5 66. 05 2 26. 42 4 52. 84 1 13. 21 6 79. 26 control 14. 77 5 73. 85 3 44. 31 2 29. 54 4 59. 08 1 14. 77 6 88. 62 affordability 21. 31 3 63. 93 2 42. 62 3 63. 93 1 21. 31 6 127. 86 safety 13. 78 3 41. 34 1 13. 78 6 82. 68 4 55. 12 2 27. 56 5 68. 9 27 352. 16 23 267. 1 24 308. 91 33 402. 68 11 134. 29 42 535. 37 speed stability total score rank continue Table 5. Concept Comparison 3 y 5 n 4 n 2 y 6 n 1 y

Concept Decision Fig. 7. Flipper Fishy Fun Model Votes -- 3 is > best

Concept Decision Fig. 7. Flipper Fishy Fun Model Votes -- 3 is > best 1 is worst Final Contestants What is good what is bad Tsunami Circle Control Stability 3 2 1 1 7 Flipper Fishy Fun Weight, Compatibility - 2 3 3 2 10 Sea Sandals everything but. . . speed 1 1 2 3 7 Table 6. Concept Decision Ask us about specific detailed reasoning after the presentation Jackie Kaelan Michelle Nicole Total

Up Close Fig. 8. Flipper Fishy Fun Model Fig. 8. 1. Flipper Fishy Fun

Up Close Fig. 8. Flipper Fishy Fun Model Fig. 8. 1. Flipper Fishy Fun Drawing

Original Idea Functions- How it Should Work The device should be able to float

Original Idea Functions- How it Should Work The device should be able to float on its own. There are shoes that roll on top of roller conveyors. The shoes are connected by paracord to pulleys on the front and back of the device. The pulleys are connected to the fins in the back. Fig. 9. Flipper Fishy Fun Sketch The fins rotate in accordance with a walking motion. The inverse motion of the fins propels the device and user forward.

Subsystem Analysis User stands on device and straps feet into footholds place on rolling

Subsystem Analysis User stands on device and straps feet into footholds place on rolling conveyors. The rolling conveyors are made of two parts: the inner dowel core and the outer rolling tube. The inner dowel is anchored into the base in three support beams: left, center, and right. The outer tube freely rotates about the inner axis to reduce friction and assist walking motion. Holding the beams in place are the perpendicular cross-beams beneath the rolling conveyors. The base is a narrow rectangle that anchors all of the subsystems together and allows user stability. The footholds roll back and forth on the pins individually to pull one of the two paddles left and right via a series of pulleys that lead from the foothold, to the paddle, back to the foothold Fig. 10. Flipper Fishy Fun Model This way the cord pulls in both directions The fins produce a propulsive force much like a bellows or a swimmer’s legs Fig. 11. Swimmer Although each individual paddle creates a diagonal force either back and right or back and left, the right and left forces should be equal and cancel out, leaving just the backwards force to push the user forwards

We used calculations to determine what materials would be ideal in constructing a functional

We used calculations to determine what materials would be ideal in constructing a functional model. For the body/frame as a replacement for wood: Carbon Fiber High Tensile Strength High Stiffness High Temperature Change Resistance Low Weight Commonly used in Aerospace, Vehicles, Military, and Sports Highly researched and benchmarked material that is safe for use More expensive part of the device because it is the most critical to design stability, strength, and longevity For the paddles at the rear: Fiberglass Cheap Reliable Lightweight Easily replaceable Also heavily used in recreational activities For the shoes: Balsa covered in Polyurethane with straps and plastic buckles Soft wood that would be comfortable to wear Covered in a safe, cheap foam for added padding and comfort Average backpack straps and buckles For the floatation: inflatable PVC buoys Strong Waterproof Durable Cheap Commonly used in bouncy castles and pool toys For the rolling pins in the middle: White Oak center dowels with Nylon coverings Oak is a cheap, readily available wood High strength Less dense than water Nylon is a cheap plastic Low friction, even without lubricant, but water would make it even more effective Easy to work with to form into the desired shape Wears slowly For the cording: Paracord High tensile strength Lightweight Heavily used in professional settings such as space-travel and military For the rear rotating rods: Aluminum Lightweight Strong Durable Corrosion resistant For the pulleys: Stainless Steel Cheap, common material High strength Corrosion resistant

Due to financial and availability restraints, we had to use more practical materials for

Due to financial and availability restraints, we had to use more practical materials for our prototype: Table 7. Materials Comparison Materials Description Modulus of Rupture (kg/sq. mm) Density (g/cm^3) Cypress (Southern Wood) Doesn’t rot in water 7. 44 0. 482 Cedar (Northern White Wood) Lightweight 4. 56 0. 315 Ash (White Wood) Malleable and sturdy 11. 01 0. 638 Oak (White Wood) High Shrinkage Values 10. 68 0. 710 Balsa (Tropical America Wood) Lightweight and durable 19. 6 0. 11 -0. 2 Dogwood (Flowering Wood) Smooth and durable 10. 72 0. 796 Rigid PVC Piping Strong, heat resistant, susceptible to solvents and chlorinated hydrocarbons. 7. 04 - 11. 62 1. 3– 1. 45 Calculations: Table 8. Buoyancy Calculations Figs. 12 -19. Materials and Materials Charts

Cost Analysis Table. 9. Bill of Materials Spent Price Quantity Total PVC Piping $3.

Cost Analysis Table. 9. Bill of Materials Spent Price Quantity Total PVC Piping $3. 62 2 $7. 24 Wooden Dowels $3. 75 9 $33. 75 Paracord $3. 98 1 $3. 98 Zipties $2. 44 1 $2. 44 Linen shelving $5. 48 1 $5. 48 Duct Tape $3. 75 2 $7. 50 Insulation Foam $10. 98 2 $23. 38 Total: $83. 77 Fig. 20. Cost Analysis

The Real Deal Prototype Faults FW Fw = Total downward Force FB= Buoyant (Upward)

The Real Deal Prototype Faults FW Fw = Total downward Force FB= Buoyant (Upward) Force FB FB Fig. 22. Force Vector Chart Fig. 21. Construction - Construction Restrictions Material Restrictions Budget Restrictions Workshop time availability Tool ability Transportation Restrictions Testing restrictions FB - Better materials Better tools Better shaping Access to workshops as needed No unnecessary weight More precision with calculations Ability to test and improve as needed

Summary and Conclusions The design did not end up working for a few reasons:

Summary and Conclusions The design did not end up working for a few reasons: ● The wood absorbed water and warped out of shape ● The cording was very difficult to stay in place ● Some fasteners came loose in the water, or couldn’t hold up to the required forces

Fig. 27. Gantt Chart

Fig. 27. Gantt Chart

Sources Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, n. d. Web. 11 Oct. 2016. "Balsa. " The Wood

Sources Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, n. d. Web. 11 Oct. 2016. "Balsa. " The Wood Database. N. p. , n. d. Web. 11 Oct. 2016. "Carbon Fibers. " Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, n. d. Web. 11 Oct. 2016. "Dinghy Decisions. " Cruising World. N. p. , n. d. Web. 11 Oct. 2016. "Flexural Strength. " Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, n. d. Web. 11 Oct. 2016. "Flexural Strength Testing of Plastics. " Flexural Strength Testing of Plastics. N. p. , n. d. Web. 11 Oct. 2016. "FOAMULAR® 150 Rigid Foam Insulation. " FOAMULAR® 150 Rigid Foam Insulation. N. p. , n. d. Web. 11 Oct. 2016. Gerard, Katie. "Top 5 Materials for Plastic Bearings Used on Metal Surfaces. " Top 5 Materials for Plastic Bearings Used on Metal Surfaces. N. p. , n. d. Web. 11 Oct. 2016. @REI. "Kayak Paddles: How to Choose. " - REI Expert Advice. N. p. , n. d. Web. 11 Oct. 2016. "Light Alloys and Metals Information. " Engineering 360. N. p. , n. d. Web. 11 Oct. 2016. Outlet, Alans Factory. "Building Materials - A Closer Look at Different Types of Wood. " Building Materials - A Closer Look at Different Types of Wood. N. p. , n. d. Web. 11 Oct. 2016.

Questions ?

Questions ?

Thank You!!!

Thank You!!!

Construction Figs. 21 -26. Construction of Model

Construction Figs. 21 -26. Construction of Model