ED2 - Gdiv-exploration/Repo_LR_6 GitHub Wiki
2.1 Use-Case diagram:
2.1.1 Functions:
| Function 1 | Function 2 | Function 3 |
|---|---|---|
| Move | Detection of waste | Detect obstacles |
| Maneuver | Collecting waste | Dodge obstacles |
2.2 Black Box Representation:
| Inputs | Outputs |
|---|---|
| MATERIAL: | MATERIAL: Waste/Pollutants |
| DATA: Command/Order | DATA: Tracking system |
| ENERGY: Battery/Current energy | ENERGY: Movement/Sound |
2.3 Glass Box Representation:
2.4 Morphological Chart:
| Function | Mean 1 | Mean 2 | Mean 3 | mean 4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.SENSOR | IR Sensor | ultrasonic sensor | ------ | ------ |
| 2.MOVEMENT | Propellers | Wheels | ||
| 3.COLLECTION | Container | Mesh | ------ | ------ |
2.5 Solutions for Defined Problem Definitions:
Concept 1 -
Description:
- The machine is used to collect waste and it will be dumped in the waste box.
- Through the radio waves transmission, the robot is autonomously controlled.
- It has sensors that can detect the waste and the weeds.
Concept 2 -
Description:
- Waste detector detects the waste and opens the collector wall then collects the waste.
- Mesh removes extra water from the collector.
- When the collector was filled then the sensor gives information to the user.
Concept 3 -
Description:
- Detects obstacles.
- Moves over the waste to collect.
- Is highly mobile.
Concept 4 -
Description:
- The robotic arm of the machine collects the waste and dumps it in the collector.
- The cost of the robot is not too expensive.
2.6 Concept Selection
2.6.1 Weight-age of each of the Objectives
| Objectives | Weightage |
|---|---|
| ``1. EFFECTIVENESS | 09 |
| 2. ASSEMBLY | 05 |
| 3. COST | 05 |
| 4. PORTABILITY | 06 |
| 5. SAFETY | 03 |
2.6.2 PUG Chart:
| Objectives | Design Idea 1 | Design Idea 2 | Design Idea 3 | design Idea 4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Effectiveness | - | - | Datum | - |
| Assembly | + | + | Datum | - |
| Cost | - - | - | Datum | - |
| portability | ++ | Datum | + | |
| Safety | + | + | Datum | + |
| + Score | 14 | 14 | - | 09 |
| - Score | 19 | 14 | - | 19 |
| Total | -5 | 0 | - | -10 |
The best concept is : Concept 3
Justification:
Design 1
| Objectives | Score Given | Justification |
|---|---|---|
| Effectiveness | - | Its not effective than the datum because the cutter and collector are small |
| Assembly | + | It is easy to assemble than the datum because of less moving parts |
| Cost | + | It is cheaper than the datum because it is less expensive to assemble |
| Portability | + | It is very small compared to the datum |
| Safety | + | It appears to be safer than the datum because the size of the cutter is small |
Design 2
| Objectives | Score Given | Justification |
|---|---|---|
| Effectiveness | - | It is not as effective as the datum |
| Assembly | + | It is easy to assemble than the datum as it has less moving parts |
| Cost | - | The machine cost is less because no usage of standard parts |
| Portability | + | The machine is small compared to the datum |
| Safety | + | The machine does not harm the aquatic animals |
Design 3
| Objectives | Score Given | Justification |
|---|---|---|
| Effectiveness | ... | Datum |
| Assembly | ... | Datum |
| Cost | ... | Datum |
| Portability | ... | Datum |
| Safety | ... | Datum |
Design 4
| Objectives | Score Given | Justification |
|---|---|---|
| Effectiveness | - | Since the robotic arm for collecting waste is not that effective |
| Assembly | - | It is not easy to assemble because it has many moving parts |
| Cost | - | It is more expensive than the datum |
| Portability | + | It is more portable than the datum |
| Safety | + | It is more safe than the datum |