TBWC Project Prototype team

docx

School

University of Guelph *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

3100

Subject

Mechanical Engineering

Date

Apr 3, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by BrigadierCrown15315

October 25 th , 2023 Team Prototype Report Section 7 Team 6 – France Authors: Jordan Townsend, jtowns02 Joshua Searle, jsearl01 Kaelyn Pluimers, kpluimer Kelly Wallace, kwalla12 Keziah Mukerji Kayani, kmukerji Muneeb Khan, Khan62 The authors take shared credit and responsibility for the content within this report.

Table Of Contents 1. TBWC Prototype Design Summary ....................................................................................... 1 1.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Photos of the TBWC Prototype ..................................................................................... 1 1.3 Idea generation Sketches – Rolling Chassis/Launcher ................................................. 1 1.4 Orthographic Sketches .................................................................................................. 1 1.5 Arduino Code ................................................................................................................ 1 1.6 Cost Analysis Tables/ Bill of Materials .......................................................................... 1 2. TBWC Prototype Performance Summary ................................................................................ 2 3. Reflection and Discussion ........................................................................................................ 2 3.1 TBWC Prototype Performance Reflection ...................................................................... 2 3.2 TBWC Country Aesthetics Consideration ....................................................................... 2 3.3 Wheelchair Accessibility Discussion ............................................................................... 2 3.4 Team Contract Review ................................................................................................... 2 4. References .............................................................................................................................. 3 Appendix A – TBWC Team Contract Original .............................................................................. 3 Appendix B – TBWC Team Contract - Revised ............................................................................ 3

TBWC Prototype Design Summary 1.1 Introduction Our team will be representing France in the Teddy Bear Wheelchair Competition. The group consists of Kelly Wallace, Joshua Searle, Jordan Townsend, Muneeb Khan, Keziah Mukerji and Kaelyn Pluimers. Initially, we combined our expectations for the outcome of the project and everyones desired final grade in order to establish a baseline. First, our group started the idea generation process and combined each member’s thoughts to ideate 2 different designs for the rolling chassis, as well as 1 design for the launching mechanism. Before building these designs, our group decided that we should start with writing the code, building the breadboard, and troubleshooting with these designs. When beginning the building process for both the rolling chassis and the launching mechanism, our group decided to divide into two smaller groups, one group working on the rolling chassis and the other working on the launching mechanism. By implementing 2 smaller groups it allowed for a more time efficent process that will also ensure each person has an area of focus during the project. While we were building, it was critical that we ensured each mechanism was stable and functioning at its highest potential. Upon testing the original build of the chassis, we came to the conclusion that it was not functioning as it should, thus leading to us rebuilding the base and re-evaluating the design. Once we were satisfied with the design we attached the battery pack, Arduino and breadboard to get the chassis ready and moving for the prototype test. 1.2 Photos of the TBWC Prototype Figure 1 -Front view of rolling chassis Figure 2- Top view of rolling chassis

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

Figure 3- Side view of launching mechanism prototype. Figure 4- Top view of launching mechanism. 1.3 Idea generation Sketches – Rolling Chassis/Launcher Figure 5 First idea generation sketch Figure 6 Second sketch first built product.

Figure 8- First idea for launching mechanism Figure 9- Second launching mechanism prototype. Figure 10 -Third launching mechanism even stronger launcher. Orthographic Sketches Figure 7 Third idea sketch and the design we finalized.

Figure 11- Orthographic sketch of the sides of our rolling chassis 1.5 Arduino Code

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

1.6 Bill of Materials and Cost Analysis Tables Table 1: Cost Tracking Summary: TBWC Development Cost – SOE Supplied Material Date Material Qty Unit Cost/Unit ($) Cost Cost Source 2023-09- 25 Arduino Mega 1 Indiv. $40.00 $40.00 TBWC Project Document 2023-09-25 Breadboard 1 Indiv. $5.00 $5.00 TBWC Project Document 2023-09-25 DC Motor 1 Indiv. $10.00 $10.00 TBWC Project Document 2023-09-25 Resistors (100Ω) 2 Part $0.10 $0.20 TBWC Project Document

2023-09-25 Capacitors (5600 pF, 10 nF, 100 nF,100 uF) 5 Part $0.50 $2.50 TBWC Project Document 2023-09-25 Diodes 2 Part $0.50 $1.00 TBWC Project Document 2023-09-25 Nuts/bolts/spacers bulk Part $2.00 $2.00 TBWC Project Document 2023-09-25 Wheels (187C and 142R) 8 Indiv. $1.00 $8.00 TBWC Project Document 2023-09-25 Large Orange Pulley 1 Indiv $2.00 $2.00 TBWC Project Document 2023-09-25 Med. Orange Pulley 1 Indiv $1.00 $1.00 TBWC Project Document 2023-09-25 Meccano part (2 holes) 4 Part $0.20 $0.80 TBWC Project Document 2023-09-25 Meccano part (3 holes) 4 Part $0.30 $1.20 TBWC Project Document 2023-09-25 Meccano part (5 holes) 2 Part $0.50 $1.00 TBWC Project Document 2023-09-25 Meccano part (6 holes) 4 Part $0.60 $2.40 TBWC Project Document 2023-09-25 Meccano part (11 holes) 4 Part $1.10 $4.40 TBWC Project Document 2023-09-25 Meccano part (12 holes) 4 Part $1.20 $4.80 TBWC Project Document 2023-09-25 Meccano part (15 holes) 3 Part $1.50 $4.50 TBWC Project Document 2023-09-25 Meccano part (25 holes) 1 Part $2.50 $2.50 TBWC Project Document Meccano part (87 holes) 1 Part $8.70 $8.70 TBWC Project Document 2023-10-02 IC motor controller 1 Indiv. $12.00 $12.00 TBWC Project Document 2023-10-02 22 AWG Wire 17 pieces (1m) Part $2.00 $2.00 TBWC Project Document 2023-10-02 Starter AA batteries 8 Indiv $1.00 $8.00 TBWC Project Document 2023-10-13 AA Battery Holder 1 Indiv. $5.00 $5.00 TBWC Project Document 2023-10-19 Rods 2 Part (6.5 inches) $1.00 $6.50 TBWC Project Document 2023-10-19 Replacement Arduino Uno 1 Indiv. $40.00 $40.00 TBWC Project Document Total Cost: $175.50 Table 2: Cost Tracking Summary: TBWC Development Cost – Team Purchased or Sourced Material Date Material Qty Unit Cost/ Unit ($) Cost Cost Source 2023-10- Bracelet- 3 pkg 0.40 $1.20 https://www.dollarama.com/en-CA/p-20pk-embroidery-

13 making String threads/3033863 2023-10- 14 Cardboard box 1 Part $1.99 $1.99 https://canada.michaels.com/en/kraft-gift-box-by-celebrate-it/ 10399973.html?r=g 2023-10- 14 Bag of Rubber bands 10 pkg $0.01 $0.10 https://www.dollarama.com/en-CA/p-multicolor-rubber- bands/3051249 2023-10- 15 Panko box 115 g $0.01 $1.15 Recyclable material cost-TBWC Project Document 2023-10- 15 Cardboard base 70 g $0.01 $0.70 Recyclable material cost-TBWC Project Document 2023-10- 14 Acrylic Paint 3 Indiv. $1.50 $4.50 https://www.dollarama.com/en-CA/p-white-acrylic-paint/ 0201774 Total Cost: $9.64 2.0 Prototype Performance Summary Professor Wael Ahmed conducted our prototype test on Monday, October 23 rd . The rolling chassis operated mostly as intended, we did run into one issue regarding the elastic band which had the pivotal role in the wheel’s function. The issue regarding the elastic band was swiftly resolved by adjusting the positioning of the elastic. Our launch system functioned flawlessly without issue and was able to launch the ball provided to us. Furthermore, the sketches we had provided were met with great feedback and clearly showed the process that took us from just a plan to our prototype. We are currently in a favourable position in the TBWC project, we just need to work on the safety of the wheelchair and incorporating the accessibility standards of our chosen country. We are still working hard towards our final design and the feedback provided to us by professor Wael Ahmed has given us confidence in the direction were heading and has given us different methods to approach our project with many different views. 3.1 TBWC Prototype Performance Reflection. The wheelchair was successful in moving forwards and backwards autonomously. No structural issues were present during or preceding the initial testing. All parts required to move the wheelchair (breadboard, Arduino, motor, etc.) were mounted securely on the chair. The main limitation of the wheelchair itself is the difference in movement when comparing driving forwards to driving backwards. The wheelchair moves further backwards than it does forwards, which can be attributed to a slight error in the connection between the motor and the rear wheels.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

The launching mechanism was functional in shooting the TBWC soccer ball without being under Arduino control. Along with this, multiple tests of the launching mechanism have shown that it is consistent in its ability to launch the TBWC soccer ball. It was decided that the cannon will be mounted on the outside of the box that will have the teddy bear inside of it, providing a clear path to advancing the launching mechanism for further testing and development. A prevalent weakness of the cannon is the lack of range it possesses. The launching mechanism cannot shoot the TBWC soccer ball more than a couple feet at its current stage of development. While this is an issue that can be adjusted, it could prove to be a hindrance if not dealt with. A valuable lesson learned throughout building the prototype and during the testing with Professor Ahmed was to enjoy the process of creating and growing as a team, as opposed to strictly focusing on the result. This new, positive outlook on the design process will allow the group to accept small mishaps and failures while brainstorming or applying new concepts to building the wheelchair. There were multiple occasions where the original idea or creation did not work, and new ideas had to be formed to move forward. While this caused frustration, it is important to be grateful for the hurdles faced when following, or creating, any process. It is impossible to learn without first realizing one’s mistakes, or wrongdoings. Getting it on the first try would have meant that there was nothing to learn, there was no room for improvement for growth individually, or as a team; this would defeat the purpose of the assignment. We plan to integrate this lesson throughout the rest of the assignment by facing each mistake with a positive, growth mindset. Instead of becoming emotional or stressed over mistakes, we will build off said mistakes and use them as an opportunity to become a more patient, interdependent group. 3.2 TBWC Country Aesthetics Considerations The country of France prides itself for their style, arts, and beauty. High fashion, cuisine, art, film, and entertainment are some of the many valued art industries of their culture. This country, rich in culture, has numerous symbols that define it. To start off, the France flag made up of 3 stripes of red, white, and blue, sometimes know to represent different types of flowers such as poppies, marguerites, and cornflowers respectively. The Gallic Rooster represents a time in the past where French people were known as Gauls, a Latin term for rooster [1]. The rooster symbol shows up on flags, stamps, and many more. Some of the more unofficial culture symbols are the baguette, Eiffel Tower, cheese, and berets. [2] Lastly, France’s motto “Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité” (translates to Liberty, Equality, Fraternity) is extremely important since it represents the French Revolution.[3] Since then people of France are free and have equal rights. Considering all these important cultural aspects and symbols of France, our group has decided on a way to accurately represent our country during the TBWC competitions. We plan to paint the France flag onto the sides of the box for the teddy bear to sit in as well as make mini flags out of paper to act as wheelchair handles on the back of the box. The motto Liberty, Equality, Fraternity will be written on the front of the wheelchair box, and on the back side of the box we will represent the Gallic Rooster. Finally, our teddy

bear will be wearing a beret on its head the day of the competition to represent the fashion importance of the country. 3.3 Wheelchair Accessibility Discussion The country of France has many similarities and differences to the cities of Guelph and Kitchener when it comes to wheelchair accessibility. To begin with similarities, both areas require that all buildings can be accessed by people with disabilities [5,6]. This includes wide enough doorways, ramps, and elevator access where necessary. They also both have public transportation options for people in wheelchairs. In Guelph and France, buses have electronic ramps and lowered floors to allow people to easily access the transportation [5,7]. France also has trams, which are trolley cars that are low enough to the ground, making them wheelchair accessible [8]. Both areas also tolerate no discrimination against people with disabilities in a workplace and school setting [5,9]. Employers and educators must take steps to ensure that their building and everyday required tasks are wheelchair friendly. It is also required in both areas that there be designated parking spaces close to the buildings entrance for wheelchair users [5,10]. Additionally, there are differences between France and Guelph’s wheelchair accessibility. The main problem that France faces when it comes to wheelchair accessibility is that its infrastructure is not up to date, and therefore its streets and buildings were not designed for wheelchair users like modern buildings today are [8]. France has streets made of cobblestone that are hard for wheelchair users to use. These areas have narrow alley ways that restrict access for wheelchair users. While it is required for all buildings to be accessible in France and Guelph this is a lot harder for France to achieve this. France is full of old historic buildings that are hard to make accessible for wheelchair users, and progress to improve access to these buildings has been slow [11]. The design of our TBWC fits in with the accessibility requirements for France. In France, it is required that all wheelchairs can move freely to access ramps and wheelchair door entrances. Our wheelchair is built with high stability, as it is low to the ground and is built with four wheels to make it as stable as possible. This makes our wheelchair have a low risk of tipping and allows wheelchair users to easily use ramps and travel uphill to reach their desired destination. Our TBWC is also a narrow design, allowing it to easily fit through doorways and navigate the narrow old cobblestone streets in France.

Figure 12 5 - This is a picture of a narrow old street in Normandy France [12]. A wheelchair that is narrow and stable would be needed to navigate through streets like this. Figure 13 6 - This picture shows a public bus in France that has a ramp for wheelchair users [7]. To use this ramp a stable wheelchair that doesn’t tip is needed. 3.4 Team Contract Review Our team has worked very well together so far in the design project. We can clearly communicate with each other, everyone in the group does their part and we are all open to ideas and plans for the design. Since we have been working very well together, we made minimal changes to our team contract. From our original team contract, we kept that everyone needs to be respectful towards everyone’s feelings and opinions on the project. We have all been nice to each other about ideas of the design and think it needs to stay this way. We kept taking responsibility for independent work in our team contract because it is important that everyone continues to do their part outside of our team meetings. We kept working towards a common grade in the contract because we still all want to achieve a good grade in this project. We also kept our statement about team meetings on Wednesday at 5:30. Everyone in our group has honoured this part of the contract and always shows up to the meetings

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

when they are able to so there was no reason to change it. While we have not had many conflicts in our group, we kept the statement about addressing conflicts you are having with someone right away because it is important that we continue to honestly communicate with each other. We also kept the part about submitting reports and meeting deadlines because it is important that everyone finishes their work on time. While everything has been going well in our group, we did change a few things in our team contract. The first was utilizing everyone’s individual strengths to create the design. Originally, we thought everyone would be assigned to a specific part of the project and only work on the parts that relate to their strengths. However, many aspects of the project were harder than we originally thought and required a group effort to figure out. An example of this is the wiring for the Arduino. We originally thought that only a few people would work on this but since we struggled with getting the motor to run everyone in our group had to work together on this part. This taught us a valuable lesson to not be afraid to ask for help and that sometimes to accomplish a task you need to use everyone’s different perspectives. From learning this lesson, we agreed that from now on we will use everyone’s perspective and skills when constructing and discussing ideas. This will help us finish tasks more efficiently. We plan to integrate this lesson into our design process by clearly communicate when we are stuck on something so we can ask for help and together as a group figure out the issue. Another part of the contract that we changed was that our logbooks needed to be completed the day of our meetings. We changed this to two days after our meetings as the day of was unrealistic and it was hard to achieve. This taught us the lesson to prioritize what is important in the design. While the logbooks are important it is more important to build the design and we should not waste the time we meet on logbooks when we have so many other things to do. We plan to integrate this lesson into our design by not worrying about finishing the logbooks during the team meetings. The last thing that we changed was the use of Microsoft teams for group communication. We found that it is harder to communicate on teams as people don’t check their messages on this platform as often. Instead, we decided to use messages to communicate with the group and shared files through word. 4.0 – References [1] S. Gruber, “Liberté, égalité, Fraternité – Liberty, equality, fraternity,” Die Welt der Habsburger, https://www.habsburger.net/en/chapter/liberte-egalite-fraternite-liberty- equality-fraternity#:~:text=Liberté%2C%20égalité%2C%20fraternité%20–%20Liberty%2C %20Equality%2C%20Fraternity%3A,only%20upon%20the%20common%20good (accessed Oct. 18, 2023). [2] “France Symbols,” France This Way, https://www.francethisway.com/info/france- symbols.php#:~:text=%27Official%27%20Symbols%2C%20such%20as,the%20baguette %20or%20the%20beret (accessed Oct. 18, 2023). [1] What are the most significant symbols of France?, https://www.cia-france.com/blog/culture-french-traditions/symbols- of-france (accessed Oct. 18, 2023).

[3] What are the most significant symbols of France?, https://www.cia-france.com/blog/culture-french-traditions/symbols-of-france (accessed Oct. 18, 2023). [4] S. Gruber, “Liberté, égalité, Fraternité – Liberty, equality, fraternity,” Die Welt der Habsburger, https://www.habsburger.net/en/chapter/liberte-egalite-fraternite-liberty- equality-fraternity#:~:text=Liberté%2C%20égalité%2C%20fraternité%20–%20Liberty %2C%20Equality%2C%20Fraternity%3A,only%20upon%20the%20common%20good (accessed Oct. 18, 2023). [5] C. o. Guelph, "2015 Facility Accessibility Design Manual," City og Guelph, June 2015. [Online]. Available:file:///C:/Users/12263/Downloads/Guelph_FADM_2015-06-30- FINAL.pdf. [Accessed 24 October 2023]. [6] K. M. G. L. d. Angloinfo, "People With Disabilities," Angloinfo, [Online]. Available: https://www.angloinfo.com/how-to/france/healthcare/people-with-disabilities#. [Accessed 24 October 2023]. [7] J. Sage, "Disabled Access Review of Paris," Sage Traveling, 1 April 2013. [Online]. Available: https://www.sagetraveling.com/Paris-Disabled-Access. [Accessed 24 October 2023]. [8] Sirva, "Diversity and Inclusion In France," Sirva, [Online]. Available: https://team.expatarrivals.com/europe/france/diversity-and-inclusion-france . [Accessed 24 October 2023]. [9] L. Shepherd, "French Law Requires Companies to Employ Workers with Disabilities," SHRM, 4 December 2019. [Online]. Available: https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/hr- topics/global-hr/pages/france-employ-workers-with-disabilities.aspx. [Accessed 24 October 2023]. [10] C. Paylor, "Parking in France: Car Parks, Blue Zones, & Parking Fines," French Entree, 14 January 2022. [Online]. Available: https://www.frenchentree.com/living-in-france/driving/driving-in-france/parking-in- france-car-parks-blue-zones-parking-fines/#:~:text=Disabled%20car%20parking %20spaces%20are%20common%20throughout%20France.,Card%20%28see%20here %20for%20more%20information%2. [Accessed 24 October 2023]. [11] Expatica, "Paris: an obstacle course for wheelchair users," Expatica, 25 July 2016. [Online]. Available: https://www.expatica.com/fr/general/afp-paris-an-obstacle-course-for- wheelchair-users-60581/ . [Accessed 24 October 2023]. [12] L. Mcfarland, "Narrow Street, Normandy, France," Word Press, 12 June 2020. [Online]. Available: https://leomcfarland.wordpress.com/2020/06/12/narrow-street-normandy- france/. [Accessed 24 October 2023]. Appendix A – Original Team Contract

Appendix B – Revised Team Contract

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version