5. CONCEPT EVALUATION AND PRODUCT ARCHITECTURE - P-Div-Engg-Exploration-Odd-2026-27/Repo-02 GitHub Wiki

PUGH CHART

Design Objectives	Weights	Design 1	Design 2	Design 3	Design 4 (Datum)
Safety	9	0	0	+	DATUM
Ease of use	7	+	+	+	DATUM
Portability	5	-	+	+	DATUM
Use of standard parts	6	+	+	+	DATUM
Cost	6	+	+	+	DATUM
Score (+)		19	24	33	0
Score (-)		5	0	0	0
Total		14	24	33	0

5.1 JUSTIFICATIONS FOR SCORE GIVEN :-

Design No.	Objective	Score Allocated	Justification for the Score
1	Safety	0	Employs a similar battery pack and wiring configuration as the Datum, offering no significant safety advantage or disadvantage.
	Ease of use	+	The Arduino Uno is much simpler to program for basic motor control than configuring the Datum's Raspberry Pi.
	Portability	-	The Arduino Uno board footprint is relatively large, taking up considerable space on the chassis compared to more compact solutions.
	Use of standard parts	+	The Arduino Uno and BO motors are extremely common, off-the-shelf electronics compared to specialized LiDAR.
	Cost	+	Swapping the Raspberry Pi and LiDAR for an Arduino Uno and ToF sensor reduces the overall build cost.
2	Safety	0	The power delivery and overall mechanical layout pose the same baseline risks as the Datum.
	Ease of use	+	Interfacing an ultrasonic sensor with an Arduino Nano is far more straightforward than processing complex LiDAR point-cloud data.
	Portability	+	The internal Arduino Nano is substantially smaller and lighter than the Datum's Raspberry Pi.
	Use of standard parts	+	Ultrasonic sensors and Arduino Nanos are highly ubiquitous, standard components in robotics.
	Cost	+	The combination of a Nano and an ultrasonic sensor is drastically cheaper than a Pi and LiDAR setup.
3	Safety	+	The ATtiny84 draws minimal current, and the simple LED indicators and IR sensors reduce complex electrical failure/overheating risks compared to the Datum's Pi and LiDAR.
	Ease of use	+	Using 3x basic IR sensors requires highly simple digital logic, bypassing the complex programming required for LiDAR.
	Portability	+	Utilizing a bare ATtiny84 chip minimizes the electronic footprint and weight far beyond the capabilities of the Datum's bulky Raspberry Pi.
	Use of standard parts	+	Basic IR sensors, BO motors, and ATtiny ICs are among the most standard, widely available electronic components.
	Cost	+	This design strips out all expensive computing and sensing hardware, making it the most budget-friendly option by a wide margin.
4	All Objectives	DATUM	Serves as the baseline design, featuring a Raspberry Pi, LiDAR sensor, gesture sensor, and BO motors on a 6-legged mechanism.

5.2 SELECTED DESIGN

5.3 FUNCTION CLUSTERING

SL. No.	Subsystem
1	Movement System
2	Body system
3	Control & Behaviour System

5.4 INTERACTIONS BETWEEN SUBSYSTEMS

From / To	Subsystem 1 (Movement)	Subsystem 2 (Body system)	Subsystem 3 (Control & Behaviour)
Subsystem 1	—	Spatial: YESData: NOMaterial: YES	Spatial: NOData: YESMaterial: YES
Subsystem 2	Spatial: YESData: NOMaterial: YES	—	Spatial: NOData: NOMaterial: YES
Subsystem 3	Spatial: NOData: YESMaterial: YES	Spatial: NOData: NOMaterial: YES	—