ME 2110:

Final Presentation

Seal Team Tango (Group 4):

Wesley Leckie

Sean MacMullan

​

​

April 10, 2019

​

Problem Overview

• Build device to win competition by maximizing points
• Score points by completing following tasks:
• Launch (10 pts.)
• Clear Rocks Around Lunar Module (60 pts. total)
• Deploy/Clear Sensor Decoys (42 pts.)
• Place Flag (44 pts.)
• Egress (x2 flag pts.)

2

Figure 1: Competition Items and Arena. [1]

Important Customer Needs

3

Figure 2: Excerpt from House of Quality. [2]

Important engineering requirements:

• Time to complete tasks
• Percent of total points scored
• Number of electrical components
• Chance of dangerous malfunction
• Weight

Specifying Requirements

4

Figure 3: Excerpts from Specification Sheet.

Easy-to-use list of requirements from design documents

Additional requirements to help satisfy important customer needs

Reliable

Reliable

Portable

Reliable

Safe

User Friendly

Essential Functionality

5

Figure 4: Function Tree for Final Design Project.

• Fulfilling tasks contributes to point score
• Functions with dependencies deserve more attention
• Some functions risk points or disqualification if poorly implemented

​

Exploring Solutions and Their Limitations

6

Figure 5: Top of Morphological Chart for Final Project Design.

Solution worked well in individual competition

Simple and fast;

a tried and true solution

Potential tradeoffs between reliability and sensor usage

Exploring Solutions and Their Limitations

7

Figure 6: Bottom of Morphological Chart for Final Project Design.

Precision and ability to retract

Small motion, doesn’t require “powered” actuation

Unreliable

Risky

Alternatives for Lunar Ridge Approach

• Simple and consistent
• No need for powered components
• Easy removal and assembly
• Stable

​

Figure 7: Concept Evaluation Matrix for Approaching the Lunar Ridge.

Rock Clearing Alternatives

• Rotating arm can makes several passes, ensuring rocks are always cleared
• Only one moving part for all three rocks; more compact and easier to work with

Figure 8: Concept Evaluation Matrix for Removing Rocks.

Zone Detection Alternatives

• Easier to work with and troubleshoot
• Less parts, making it more compact and less likely to malfunction

​

Figure 9: Concept Evaluation Matrix for Determining Current Zone.

Decoy Deposit Alternatives

• Consistent actuation
• Less likely to interfere with flow of decoys
• Closer placement to decoy tube
• However, use of both motors for other functions required use to go with second best option, Solenoid Release

​

Figure 10: Concept Evaluation Matrix for Deploying Sensor Decoys.

Flag Placement Alternatives

• Less moving parts to fail
• Less variability in drop position
• More compact
• Less weight, keeping center of mass closer to base
• Fewer pinch points (safer)

Figure 11: Concept Evaluation Matrix for Moving Flag to Summit.

Final Design

Figure 13: Ridge Module (Front View).

Figure 14: Ridge Module (Side View).

Figure 12: Final Design for Device.

Original Design

Original Design

References

[1] George W. Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering, “Big Design Project (rev. 2)” 2110.me.gatech.edu, Feb. 16, 2019. [Online]. Available: http://2110.me.gatech.edu/studios.

​

[2] C. Battles. (2011, May). QFD House of Quality Template. Schrodinger's Ghost.com [Online]. Available: http://www.schrodingersghost.com/?cat=54.

​

[3] Georgia Institute of Technology, “Mechatronics and Pneumatics Kit Manual,” 2110.me.gatech.edu, Jan. 2019. [Online]. Available: http://2110.me.gatech.edu/mechatronicskit.

​

[4] George W. Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering, “Design Evaluation Methods”, Christopher Saldana, 2110.me.gatech.edu, Feb. 16, 2019. [Online]. Available: http://2110.me.gatech.edu/sites/default/files/documents/Lecture_Slides/me2110_spring_2019_lecture_06_evaluation.pdf

​

​