Team Vision for Problem Definition Phase
Project Summary
Electric longboards have been around for almost decades at this point but current models suffer from numerous limitations and flaws that make them unappealing to the vast majority of potential consumers. Most have unnecessarily long ranges, being capable of going 10, 15, 20, or even more miles on a single charge even though that’s substantially in excess of what is needed for common use cases. This focus on a large range leads to correspondingly large batteries, significantly increasing the weight of an electric longboard to the detriment of portability, which is further impaired by the inherent length of a longboard. Current models of electric longboards are also controlled via a handheld remote, which is prone to loss or failure and makes braking and accelerating in a controlled manner difficult due to the lack of granularity and feedback. Additionally, the current steering mechanisms in electric longboards, the kingpin, exacerbate the control issues by rendering electric longboards unstable at high speeds.
The goal of this project is to design an electronically powered longboard that would be desirable to a significantly larger market than the current designs and which has a futuristic look to it that invokes feelings of freedom in the end-user. The focus would be on portability and ease of use, being collapsible such that it could fit inside of the average backpack, while being lightweight, and having a setup time of seconds. The prototype would have a max speed of at least 25 MPH and stability over the entire range of possible speeds. Further, it would incorporate a braking system, preferably regenerative, and be entirely hands-free with a control system that is integral to the longboard and manipulated via weight-shifting and foot placement.
Use Cases
Project Goals and Key Deliverables
The focus of this project is to deliver a fully functional electric longboard prototype by December of 2019. This longboard should be collapsible, stable, quick to assemble, and hands-free controlled with a minor emphasis on waterproofing and general weight reduction. This functioning prototype is the project's main deliverable, however this project is also responsible for completing a submission to Michelin's 2019 Mobility competition by March 1st. For this competition a general design with preliminary sketches and renderings needs to be submitted in a effort to show how this concept meets the criteria of Michelin's design challenge. For 2019 Michelin challenges students to envision what freedom inspiring urban transportation in the year 2035 will look like. Our design goals for this longboard incorporate feature combinations that are novel making our prototype and concept well suited for this design competition.
Interview Information
Table 1: Interview Documentation Table
| Date | Interviewee | Interview Documentation |
|---|---|---|
| 01/24/2019 | Dr. Michael Schrlau | Customer Interview 01/24/2019 |
Stakeholders
Table 2: List of Stakeholders
| Stakeholder | Position |
|---|---|
| Dr. Michael Schrlau | Customer |
| MSD Design Team | Engineers and Designers |
| Boosted, Evolve, Etc. | Major Electric Longboard Manufacturers |
Donald Pophal | Guide |
Customer Requirements
Table 3: Customer Requirements Table
| Customer Requirements | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Category | CR # | Customer Requirement | Rank (9/3/1) | Description | Comment/Status |
| Consumer Oriented Criteria | 1 | Compactibility/Ease of Use | 9 | Longboard must fit in an average sized backpack. Set-up/Storage Conversion times must be short, transition between collapsed and expanded state must be simple and without opportunity for user error. | |
| Consumer Oriented Criteria | 2 | Stability/Safety | 9 | Longboard must allow rider to have a safe and smooth riding experience. Rider must not feel longboard is rickety or that the experience of the ride is turbulent, rough, or unpredictable. | |
| Engineering Oriented Criteria | 3 | Hands Free | 9 | Rider must be able to operate longboards electric motor and breaks hands free. | |
| Engineering Oriented Criteria | 4 | Braking System | 9 | Longboard must include a functional braking system. | |
| Engineering Oriented Criteria | 5 | Electric Motor | 9 | Longboard must include a functional electric motor. | |
| Engineering Oriented Criteria | 6 | Adjustable Speed | 3 | Longboard must have adjustable high/low speeds that user can control hands free. | |
| Engineering Oriented Criteria | 7 | Waterproof | 3 | Longboard must withstand weather conditions such as rain and snow. | |
| Consumer Oriented Criteria | 8 | Lightweight | 1 | Longboard should not be burdensome to user while carrying during transit. | |
Link to the live document here.
Engineering Requirements (Metrics & Specifications)
Table 4. Engineering Requirements
Benchmarking
Table 5. Benchmarks
House of Quality
Table 6: House of Quality
Risk Assessment
Table 7: Risk Assessment Table
| Risk Category | Risk | Cause | Effect | Risk Prevention | Contingency Plan | Likelihood | Severity | Importance | Owner(s) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Technical | Failure of Force Sensors | Damage to sensing surface or blocked transmission of force to sensing surface | Complete loss of motor control/unexpected motor response | Thoroughly test force sensor installation | Use remote to control motors | 3 | 9 | 27 | Matthew G. |
| Technical | Control system causing unexpected outputs (malfunction) | Incorrect inputs were put in the system | Incorrect Outputs/System Failure | Have at least one other team member monitoring the inputs made to the system | Have a micro-controller system expert look over the system | 1 | 9 | 9 | Matthew G. |
| Technical | Electronic components protection | Exposure to external environmental factors (water,rocks, etc.) | Damage to the battery and other components | Ensure proper location and protection of electrical components. | Have a guide for a particular environment that must | 1 | 3 | 3 | Kristin O. |
| Technical | Product failure or part malfunctions | Miscalculations during design process | A non-functioning product | Mechanical Design Leads must be consulting each other | Consult with Mechanical Engineering Professor. | 3 | 9 | 27 | Tanvir M. Connor F. Erik L. |
| Safety | Pinch points in the mechanism | Folding Mechanism | Damage to hands and fingers of riders. | Proper outlined guide for Hand Placement | Wear protection gloves | 1 | 3 | 3 | Tanvir M. Connor F. Erik L. |
| Safety | Motor failure | Low resistance and Electrical overload | Corrosion of the motor shafts, bearings, and rotors | Determine the full specifications for what type of motor we are looking for | Invest in a High quality motor | 3 | 9 | 27 | Deirdre A. Matthew G. |
| Safety | Stability failure | Trucks don't work as designed | Danger to the rider of falling and hurting themselves | Conduct tests of trucks over full range of speeds with differing loads | Find trucks that are stable | 3 | 9 | 27 | Tanvir M. Connor F. |
| Safety | Overall integrity of collapsible parts | Weak focal point | Collapsible mechanism does not have a long life span and the board is damaged after few uses | Determine the best and most applicable collapsible mechanism. | Hinge system | 1 | 9 | 9 | Tanvir M. Connor F. Erik L. |
| Resource | Lack of additional funding (Budget) | Not keeping track of spending | Unable to finish design or a low quality product | Proper documentation of spending | Cut costs where necessary | 3 | 3 | 9 | Deirdre A. |
| Resource | Customer manufacturer quality and accuracy risk | Bad quality deliver | Low quality product | Make sure to order from reputable manufacturers. | Change suppliers | 1 | 9 | 9 | All |
| Resource | Lack of experienced riders to test prototypes or data collection | Lack of exposure to longboard riding | Lack of essential knowledge on the design of the longboard | Have a team meeting for instruction on how to ride the longboard | Interview experienced riders | 1 | 1 | 1 | Erik L. |
Team Plan
Over the next few weeks, we will finalize the set of deliverables, keeping an open line of communication with customer so that we can adapt to any changes in customer expectations. Research will be conducted by each member on their assigned project subsystems: motors, pressure sensors, batteries, folding mechanism, etc. Following this, after identifying the impacts any specific component of a subsystem may have with the other systems, initial design of subsystems will commence. A visual representation for the Michelin Design competition will be created by mid February.
Individual Plans
Table 8: Individual Tasks Table
| Task #1 | Task #2 | Task #3 | |
| Connor Ford | Start deck design concept. | Begin designing/testing force couple system. | Integrate force couple system into concept deck design. |
| Deirdre Arcand | Research options for collapsible mechanism design concept, identify ideal mechanism. | Communicate with Erik, Tanvir, and Connor on design ideas and considerations for deck and collapsible mechanism. | Outline in detail sub-team deliverable items and deadlines, identify and practice a means of tracking/communicating objectives throughout MSD team. |
| Erik Lydick | Research options for collapsible mechanism design concept, identify ideal mechanism. | Communicate with Deirdre, Tanvir, and Connor on design ideas and considerations for deck and collapsible mechanism. | Compile renderings and sketches and oversee submission of project for the Michelin Competition before March 1st. |
| Kristin Ostiguy | Organize research on batteries and power supply, narrow down top choices. | Assist with learning information about custom made pressure plates, how they will work for our purposes. | Outline all electrical components and how they will be integrated in order to prep for ECAD design and PCB layout |
| Matthew Gould | Finish motor research and offer final choice for motors | Create a test stand for FSR control system and run initial tests to determine feasibility and get in touch with FSR manufacturer and determine viability of chosen applications | Get motor data sheets or determine setup that will allow experimental determination of motor parameters in order to facilitate accurate motor modeling in Simulink. |
| Tanvir Majlish | Start deck design concept. | Begin designing/testing force couple system. | Integrate force couple system into concept deck design. |



