Design+Project

Goal
To design an indoor litter-collecting robot, and to create a proof-of-concept device using Lego Mindstorms, that demonstrates the functionality of your design. The "written" report is due by 18:00, 23 August 2012. Presentations of the mindstorms design/build will be at the end of the last day of Module 2.

Robot Design
A litter-collecting autonomous robot is required for indoor commercial/business applications. The robot is not expected to climb stairs, but it is expected to navigate typical indoor obstructions (walls, doors, posts and corners, furniture, people, and assorted delicate items). Each team's goal is to develop a design that responds appropriately to all obstructions, satisfies all performance needs with simple and safe operation by the users. Beyond the technical aspects, each teamis required to explain the life cycle considerations for your product, for manufacture, use ( including energy use, maintenance, and repair strategies ) and end of life.

In general, your goals are:
 * to convince the assessors (Salustri, Burns, and Rogers) that you have a good design by explaining your design decisions;
 * to incorporate as much material as makes sense to you into the design and its report.

There are no constraints on the kinds of litter that a robot can collect; teams are free to add such constraints, in consultation with the instructor, insofar as rational arguments for the constraints can be made.

Assessment of your design work will include:
 * an explanation of your design strategy;
 * breadth and critical review of background research;
 * identification of all operational and user needs, encapsulated in a requirements document;
 * a proper systems design;
 * breadth of conceptual design exploration;
 * general impact of the design on sustainability concerns, including:
 * maintenance programs and how they will be effectively undertaken,
 * replacement of worn components (planned/unplanned maintenance),
 * upgrade potential with changing technologies,
 * reprocessing at end of life, and
 * potential for remanufacture.
 * impact of aesthetics on proper use and interaction with others;
 * include a clear explanation of how your design is appropriate for the bounds of your specific problem;
 * appropriate level of detailed design, depending on the strengths of your team's members and the approach to your design; and
 * sensitivity to cost, safety, manufacturability, usability, and reliability.

You may compose/organize your report however you think is best, but it is important that you use language appropriate to the material covered in the course. For example, use the specific term "product characteristic" only in the same sense as Salustri used it. Otherwise, choose some other term (e.g. "attribute").

Mindstorms
Lego Mindstorms lets one build simple programmable robotic devices. Each team will be furnished with a Mindstorms kit for the duration of the course. Time will be allocated in Module 2 to assemble a robot that will be designed during Module 1 and in the time between Modules.

Each team will build a proof-of-concept device that represents your robot design. Of course, we do not expect the Mindstorms robot to match your design identically. The Mindstorms robot will, however, capture the most essential features of your design that can be rendered in Mindstorms. This applies particularly to the programming features of Mindstorms. DM1016 is NOT a mechatronics or robotics course. Therefore, allowances will be made in assessing the devices, with respect to the complexity of programming.

Other conditions applying to the Mindstorms exercise:
 * does NOT have to avoid people or other moving objects;
 * litter can be simulated (to prevent damage to the Mindstorms).

For assessing the Mindstorms part of the project, the following guidelines apply:
 * the faster the collection of litter, the better;
 * the wider the area the robot can cover, the better;
 * the broader the variety of litter that can be collected, the better;
 * the smaller the robot, the better;
 * the closer the robot is to your design, the better;
 * the simpler the robot, the better.

Online Project Collaboration
This wiki contains partitions for each team. Dr. Salustri will create appropriate accounts on the system once teams have been established. A wikispaces "project" will be created for each team such that only the team and the instructor can edit it. This material will be visible to the world; please do not put any sensitive information in the wiki.

Further details regarding wikispaces will be made available in due course.

Deliverables
During the afternoon of the last day of the course, each team will demonstrate their Mindstorms prototype and show graphically how its principle adapts to the total potential product requirements. Teams are expected to bring their own "litter" to be collected by their Mindstorms.

A project report is expected, in the form of web pages created in wikispaces. No hardcopy report is required.

Each team must include a Workload Distribution Chart, described below.

At ** 18:00pm on 23 August 2012 **, a copy of the wiki will be downloaded for grading. Thus, the team reports must be complete by then.

Workload Distribution Chart
The WDC is meant to describe the amount of work done by each person on each major element of the design project. This chart will be used to apportion marks to each team member. One WDC per team is expected.

Here is the format of the chart, with purely hypothetical values given.
 * ~ ITEM ||~ Person A ||~ Person B ||~ Person C ||~ Person D ||~ Person E ||
 * ~ Design Strategy || 1 || 0 || 1 || 2 || 1 ||
 * ~ Background Research || 1 || 1 || 1 || 1 || 1 ||
 * ~ Requirements || 2 || 1 || 2 || 0 || 0 ||
 * ~ Systems Design || 0 || 0 || 2 || 1 || 2 ||
 * ~ Concept Design || 1 || 2 || 0 || 1 || 1 ||
 * ~ Sustainability Issues || 2 || 1 || 1 || 1 || 1 ||
 * ~ Aesthetics/Interaction || 0 || 0 || 2 || 1 || 0 ||
 * ~ Justification || 1 || 1 || 1 || 2 || 1 ||
 * ~ Detailed Design || 1 || 1 || 1 || 1 || 2 ||
 * ~ Sensitivity to Other Issues || 1 || 1 || 1 || 1 || 1 ||

Each person should rank themselves (not one's teammates) on each item, on a scale of 0-2. 0: little or no work on that element 1: an average amount of work 2: a lot of work; took a "leadership role" for that element

The sums for each person should, ideally, be about the same indicating that, overall, everyone contributed equally.

Marks will be given to each person in proportion to the amount of work done by that person, compared to the total work done on that item. So for example, say the Design Strategy item was graded at 9/10. There were a total of 5 units of work done on that item. Person B, who put down 0 for their contribution, gets no marks for that item. Persons A, C, and E will each get one-fifth of the 9 marks. Person D will get two fifths of the 9 marks.

Usually the spread in final grades is about +/1 10%.

Please feel free to ask questions as necessary if you have concerns about this technique.