Professional Development

• I want to learn how to use LabView
• This will allow me to analyze the data gathered from our tests
• I will use the LinkedIn Learning courses
• I will complete both courses before the team starts testing and I will show the team what I learned by running analysis on the test data

LabView & Data Acquisition: LinkedIn Learning offers two couses on LabView – log into
LinkedIn Learning RIT portal and search for LabView:
https://infoguides.rit.edu/linkedinlearning
a.Learning LabView (3 hr course) by Barron Stone
b.Data Acquisition with LabView (3 hr course) by Barron Stone

Problem Definition

Intellectual Property

Three elements which I would apply intellectual property protection

1. Code used to convert image to instructions the robot can use: Copyright
2. Tool changer mechanics: Patent
3. Icon used for project: Trademark

Handling IP within the team:

Much of the technology used is in the public domain so I would leave the work in the public domain

Team Dynamics

D:14, I:7, S:40, C:40

1. Identify 2 strengths you bring to your team based on your DISC style:
   1. I am a clear thinker
   2. I am particularly good at handling challenging technical assignments
2. Identify 1 blindspot you can be more mindful of:
   1. I would have a hard time convincing other of my ideas
3. What is one pet peeve when working with others in a team who have a different style than you:
   1. Different expectations of work done by each individual 
4. What is one thing you can do differently to better communicate with an opposite DISC style:
   1. Come up with guide lines early and take time to listen to what the other person wants and needs
5. List your team member names and their core DISC styles below:

Project Planning

1. Add my information to team wiki Duration: 1 hour

2. Finalize use case Duration: 1 hour

3. Analyze client video Duration: 2 hours

4. Investigate current products Duration: 6 hours

5. Update Problem statement Duration: 2 hours

6. Add engineering requirements Duration: 3 hours

7. Review team process Duration: 1 hour

Benchmark

GRBL Plotter: http://svenhb.bplaced.net/?CNC___Plotter_2___Greifer

LY Drawbot: https://www.generativehut.com/post/ly-drawbot-a-70-pen-plotter

AxiDraw V3: https://shop.evilmadscientist.com/productsmenu/846

Individual Schedule

1. Add my information to team wiki Duration: 1 hour

2. Finalize use case Duration: 1 hour

3. Analyze client video Duration: 2 hours

4. Investigate current products Duration: 6 hours

5. Update Problem statement Duration: 2 hours

6. Add engineering requirements Duration: 3 hours

7. Review team process Duration: 1 hour

Risk Management

Risk Items:

1. Technical: Cannot find buttons that would meet the student's needs
2. Environmental: The size limits on the device make it so that the paper size has to be smaller than desired
3. Resource: The device cannot use the drawing tools the client wants
4. Safety: The device could pinch fingers when moving
5. Safety: The cords for the device could cause somebody to trip

Sphere of influence:

1. Guide: The team is influenced by the experience the guide brings
2. Client: The client's need influences the design and direction the team takes
3. Sponsor: The sponsor's financial contribution influences the team to meet the client's need

Sphere of interest:

1. End user: The abilities of the end users can change how the team designs the product
2. Campus: If classes go fully remote the team will have greater difficulty working together
3. Component Manufacturer: It may be difficult to order parts due to factory shutdowns

System Level Design

System Level Design Three week plan

Functional Decomposition

Function Tree

Transformation Diagram

Initial Concept Generation

Function: Use medium to handle user input

1. Large push buttons
   
   
2. Joystick
   
   
3. sliders
   
   
4. pressure sensors
   
   
5. tongue joysticks
   
   
6. eye tracker
   
   
7. mind reading
   
   
8. large piano keys
   
9. muscle
   
10. switches
    

Function: Identify drawing area

1. Camera
   
   
2. Laser measuring
   
   
3. manually
   
   
4. conductivity
   
   
5. sonar
   
6. pressure sensor
   
7. air movement
   
8. animals
   
9. x ray
   
10. gamma rays
    

Selection Criteria

1. Can be completed in 2 semesters
   1. The team only has the spring and fall semesters to work on the problem, if a system would require more than 2 semesters it would not be able to be completed
2. Cost
   1. The team has a budget of $1000 that could be raised to $1500 if needed, if a system would cost a significant portion of the budget is should not be used
3. Size
   1. The device needs to be able to fit on a desk, if the system is too large it cannot be used
4. Weight
   1. The device will need to be transported manually, if the system is too heavy it cannot be used
5. Complexity
   1. The device will be used by people without much technical knowledge, if significant knowledge is needed to operate the system it cannot be used
6. Safety
   1. The device will be used around people, if the system is hazardous it cannot be used 

Morphological Analysis

Possible System Solution 1:

Explanation:

• Large push buttons allow students with low mobility to hit the buttons, keyboard input allows the teacher or aid to adjust device parameters and control the device. 
• A checkered sticky mat allows the paper to be kept in place while providing location information to the camera
• The utensil is moved around the paper as it would lead to the most compact device
• The utensil is held in place with a friction fit, there are no moving components which reduces complexity
• The utensil is moved around by belts. Belts are cheap, easy to design and are widely used in industry
• The current location of the utensil holder is determined by a camera which would be easy to replace
• The paper height is determined by a button that is lowered until it presses against the paper
• The utensil height and position are determined by two lasers, when the utensil crosses both lasers the position is known 

Possible System Solution 2:

Explanation:

• A joystick allows for students with low mobility to control the device, touchscreen input allows the teacher or aid the ability to adjust device parameters on a small screen
• The paper is held in place through a suction mechanism which keeps the drawing area flat
• Two plates of copper are pressed together, where the paper is current will not flow through them so that the drawing area can be measured
• The utensil is held in a hole with a ball detent  keeping it in place
• Linear servos move the utensil head back and forth across the page
• The device creates the image line by line, the student only has to control if the utensil is up or down
• The utensil is moved up and down by a compliant mechanism with no additional moving parts.
• The location of the utensil holder is determined by a sonar sensor which does not need to be directly connected to the holder
• The paper height is determined by measuring the height and manually entering it into the device
• The utensil is pressed against a force sensor to determine the height
• A upwards facing camera is used to determine the utensil location.

Possible Solution 3:

• Encoders can be directly connected to stepper motors for easy position calculations
• A servo with arm is an easy way to move the chuck up and down
• Holding the paper down with borders makes sure that the entire edge is held down
• Moveable borders allow for great paper holding
• The bottom of the cup is at the same height as the bed so the utensil height is known
• The user pushes a button when the utensil hits the paper
• Belts are cheap and easy to design
• A chuck allows for a wide variety of utensil diameters

Feasibility

Analysis: How much power will we need to supply?

Bench marking: What micro controller will support the inputs we need?

Prototyping: What is the best way to hold the utensil?

Standards

1. ISO 19027:2016
   1. International standard for using pictoral symbol
      1. The input device will need to have pictoral symbols to indicate what function each input has
         
         
2. ISO 17049:2013
   
1. Application of braille on signage, equipment and appliances
   1. If the input device is going to be used for a vision impaired student the application of braille on the device would aid in understanding the function of each input
3. ISO 7573:2008
   
   1. Technical product documentation - parts list
      1. One of the deliverables is a user guide to the device, the device will be composed of parts and therefore a parts list is needed

I do not think the team should consider apply to a standards grant.

Preliminary Detailed Design

Preliminary Detailed Design Three Week Plan

Stepper motor controllers

https://www.robotshop.com/en/ustepper-s-arduino-compatible-module-stepper-motor-driver.html

https://www.robotshop.com/en/ustepper-s-lite-arduino-compatible-module-stepper-motor-driver.html

Complete Detailed Design

Complete Detailed Design Three Week Plan

MSD II

Build and Test Prep

Build and Test Prep Three Week Plan

Subsystem Build and Test Prep

Subsystem Build and Test Prep Three Week Plan

System Integration Build and Test Prep

System Integration Build and Test Prep Three Week Plan

Customer Handoff

Customer Handoff Three Week Plan

End of MSD2

End of MSD2 Three Week Plan