2020-spring - CORONA CRUSH SAGA

CONTEST LIVE FEED CLICK HERE!!!

CORONA CRUSH SAGA

MAE Football League

Everybody knows the feeling: Your team has done all the hard work, there is one second left, and all that you need to win is 3 points. The ball is snapped, the kick is up, and it IS … ???????

BREAKING NEWS: In order to allow for social distancing and bring back the MFL, commissioners Prof Lucas and Prof Qi have banned place-kickers on the field!!! Join the Special Teams unit to design a kicking mechanism capable of the ultimate field-goal kick: 99 yards away, 1 second left, and the Super Bowl is on the line. THE PRESSURE IS ON!!

 As a design challenge, MAE3 students will design a fully mechanical, automatic device that converts a fixed amount of potential energy to score a 99 yard field goal in the Super Bowl. They will build reduced "At-Home" prototypes to demonstrate the value of their design, and compete with other teams for funding from the up-and-coming MAE Football League (MFL)

Design Challenge:

Teams will use Fusion 360 to design at least 3 concepts, and one final ball-striking or launching machine (their "MFL Design"), that fits in a 4’ x 4’ footprint and is capable of delivering a standard US football over a cross-bar 10’ high, 99 yards away, between uprights of infinite height and 18’ 6’’ apart. Designs may use the equivalent of ten “kickers” of potential energy (10 x 100 kg x 2 m x g = 20 KJ). Use basic analysis to calculate the energy, power, and torque necessary to score the field goal.

The MFL Design must be designed to work with a football that starts out touching the ground. The football can be touching the ground in any configuration, but it must be touching the ground.

Acceptable energy sources for the MFL Design: springs, weights, rubber bands, anything that stores potential energy. No electricity.

Each team will fabricate two “At-Home” prototypes based on their MFL Design: one for risk reduction (their "Risk Reduction Prototype," TEAM PROTOTYPE), and one for a class-wide competition (INDIVIDUAL "Final Prototype").

Risk reduction prototype:

Each team must perform a risk reduction by testing a portion of a proposed design (due Week 8). The Risk Reduction Prototype may make use of materials that aren't contest-legal, but the majority of the materials used must be from the contest-legal kit. The Risk Reduction Prototype should be designed to test an important uncertainty in the concept development stage of your full-scale design. Motivated by this, it should at least contain a mechanism that shows conversion of potential energy to kinetic energy. It is not expected to be a “full” prototype, but if the risk reduction prototype tests more of your concept, then the following weeks will likely be easier. Details on the deliverables from the Risk Reduction are available in Assignment 7. Although every individual CANE make a RISK REDUCTION prototype, only 1 (for the team) is required. That is, the RISK REDUCTION is a team exercise.

Competition prototype:

Each individual must produce a Final Prototype (due Week 10) based on their MFL Design. Note that the final prototypes produced by a team may be slightly different, despite starting from the same design. The Final Prototype must start within a 8.5 ‘’ (width) x 8.5 ‘’ (length) x 11’’ (height) volume when fully set up. It must convert potential energy to kinetic energy via a mechanism, and must strike a standard paper football into the air. To score, the football must pass between the uprights (6’’ wide, 1’ tall, 6’’ vertical distance from crossbar to plane parallel to base of launcher) without touching any surface after strike/launch. Passing the football between the uprights is still considered scoring if the football passes over over the top of the uprights. The launcher must be fitted with a triggering device such that the human interaction which triggers the launcher contributes no energy to the football. Detailed competition rules below.

Acceptable energy sources for the Competition Prototype: Anything that can be found inside the kit.

Head to Head Competition:

In the competition, teams use their competition prototype to deliver a paper football to a target with defined dimensions a particular distance away. The goal of the competition is to kick the longest possible field goal in a head-to-head format. Every individual on each team must build a competition prototype, but not every individual prototype needs to be used in each round.

This is a Match Play competition. The rules are as follows:

 Game play and scoring:

Teams compete against each other in matches. In each match, there are 5 rounds, each worth one point. Each round is composed of a challenge and a response. The first team to kick in a round issues a challenge, by attempting a kick of a certain distance. If the first team makes the kick, the second team must respond by making a kick of the same distance, or greater. If the challenge succeeds and the response fails, the point is awarded to the challenging team. If the response succeeds and the challenge fails, the point is awarded to the responding team. If both fail or both succeed, then the round is tied, and the points from the tied round are pushed to the next round. Thus a win in round two after a push in round 1 is worth two points. If round 1 and round 2 are both pushes, a round 3 win would be worth 3 points, and so on. Note that every kick in a match must be at least as far as the kick that succeeded before it.

Teams get a 1 point bonus if two teammates each make kicks with their prototype and a 2 point bonus if three teammates each make kicks within each match. Thus the highest possible score is 7 points. in one match.

Kicking order:

Lead-off kicking is decided by referee coin flip. The first kicking team (Team 1) kicks the base-line distance (6’). Team 2 then attempts a 6’ or longer attempt. If both kicks are good, it is a push and the point is carried over to the next round. If both kicks miss, it is a push and the point is carried over to the next round. Round 2 is led off by the winner of round 1. If both kicks are misses, Team 2 leads off Round 2. If both kicks are made, Team 1 leads off the Round 2, but must kick from an equal to greater distance than the Team 2 kick from Round 1.

Competition Structure:

The class winner is determined in an online competition in the familiar bracket format. Competition will occur on finals week, with the quarterfinals through finals occurring on the assigned finals time live. TBD.

Tie Breakers:

In the case of a tie, rounds will be added to the match if time allows. If there is not enough time, ties will be decided by the judges.

Materials:

Football: One standard paper football made according to Contest tutorial. Printer or notebook paper only.

Goal: Can be made of any material but must have 1) the proper dimensions defined in the Contest tutorial, 2) facilitate accurate scoring, 3) be able to be set at various distances 

Kicking Machine:

8.5 x 11’ Paper (any bond)

Pens (Plastic only),

Pencils (wood only),

Chop Sticks (plant-based only)

Paper Clips (up to 10 in final design, acceptable size range from 3/4’’ to 4’’)

Rubber bands (up to 6 in final design)

Cardboard (1 square foot, < 1 lb)

Glue (only for joining)

Tape (only for joining)

Weight (up to 0.89 lb (407g), aka one can of soda, or 72 quarters, or up to you, but must be verifiable) 

Up to 10’ of dental floss, fishing line (<= 20 lb test), or string (<=1/16 diameter)

Note that you don't have to purchase all of these. You are free to use resources you have at home as long as they fit the criteria listed above. In addition, you are not required to use all of the above materials.

Deliverables Summary

- Risk Reduction Prototype (Week 8)

- Final Prototype (Week 10)

- CAD for MFL Design (Week 10)

- Team Webpage (Week 10, details posted on Canvas)

- Presentation of Design (Week 10, details posted on Canvas, slides about presentation in "Files" at bottom of page)

- Design Challenge Report (Sunday June 7th, 11:59 pm, details below, example report in "Files" at bottom of page)

Design Challenge Report Guidance

Each student will write a report on their team's work for the Design Competition. The report should be double spaced, in a professional font, and generally look well made. There is a report from Spring 2019 attached at the bottom of this page, which you may find useful as an example (but you should note that the prompt in Spring 2019 was not the same as this one).

This report [100 pts] will:

• 1. Present their MFL design and their Final Prototype, explaining the general operation in enough detail for someone that hasn't heard of the competition [25 pts]. 

This explanation should involve:

• • 1. [3pts] A render of the MFL Design, and an image of your prototype  -- these should be pretty, to draw people in.

    2. [3pts] CAD of the MFL Design, and sketches of your prototype -- these should be functional, used as diagrams to show how parts are connected.

    3. [3pts] Calculations that show your MFL design is capable of reaching the design goal of kicking a football 99 yards over a crossbar 10’ high. This calculation doesn't have to use an FBD (for instance, it coule be done via energy analysis). Discuss whether your design includes a factor of safety. THIS CAN BE DONE ONCE BY EACH TEAM.

    4. [3pts] CAD or sketch of the specific component that will be analyzed (CAD if it’s part of the MFL Design, sketch if it’s part of a prototype)

    5. [3pts] a clear description of the role the analyzed component plays in the larger machine.

    6. [5pts] Explain ways in which their prototype is useful for evaluating the MFL Design, as well as ways in which their prototype does not well represent your MFL Design.

    7. [5pts] Discuss the actual performance of their prototype, giving physical quantities. For example, the distance kicked, the height kicked, average velocity of the paper football, and similar metrics.

• 1. Present an analysis on a component of either their MFL Design or their prototype [45 pts]. 

This analysis should include:

• • 1. [5pts] A problem statement -- what are we going to learn about your machine? The goal must be a maximum or minimum of some kind (for example, “maximum exit velocity of football”, “minimum force required to release the trigger”, etc)

    2. [5pts] Assumptions -- these must be appropriate for the analysis.

    3. [10pts] The relevant Free Body Diagram(s). Follow the rules for good FBD’s (include coordinate axes, no internal forces, etc)

    4. [20pts] A solution which ultimately answers the problem statement. This solution must start from force/moment balance equations obtained from the FBD’s. Using those equations, the work will proceed as needed to answer the problem statement.

    5. [5pts] Calculate the realized Factor of Safety of their component and interpret the value

• 1. [10pts] Compare and contrast success of competition prototype approaches between all team members’ prototypes (points scored in fixed time, maximum distance kicked, etc). Reasons for differences between prototypes should be proposed and justified.

  2. [20 pts] Present a half-page reflection on the design process. This reflection should discuss limitations of the chosen design, any design changes that would be made if given a second chance, other design avenues that you would consider exploring, and the most valuable lesson learned during completion of the project. Also please provide feedback about the course structure you feel comfortable communicating directly to the instructors. Remember to also fill out your CAPES!!

Note that there can not be overlap between team members on the analysis, unless explicitly allowed by the professors. Each team member must analyze something different. If the design cannot be split into enough "components", the MAE3 instructors will work with the team to find an acceptable division.

MFL Design Challenge Report Rubric, SP 20

Part 1: Description of Component [25 pts]

[3] Prototype photo & CAD render

[3] 3D CAD of entire MFL design

• • Must include good image(s) (clear, appropriate orientation)

  • Must include good text description (clear, understandable)

[3] Brief calculations, showing MFL Design can provide the exit velocity needed

[6] 3D CAD/sketch of component to be analyzed

• • Must include good image(s) (clear, appropriate orientation)

  • Must include good text description (clear, understandable)

[5] Prototype justification for final MFL design (at least 3)

[5] Overview of prototype performance, must be quantitative

Part 2: Analysis [45 pts]

[5] Problem Statement

[5] Assumptions (at least 3)

• • To get full points, you need to have all the necessary and accurate assumptions. For example, for drive train design, it is necessary to talk about stall vs slip in assumptions    

[10 pts] FBD 

Good FBDs should: 

• • Have all the reaction forces 

  • Have coordinate axes

  • No Internal forces

  • FBDs for all the necessary components or subsystems

  • No missing forces (check the balance of the forces!)

  • All  forces labeled 

  • Check for internal forces labeled and check for correct application of equal and opposite forces

[20 pts]  Force/torque and/or Power/speed analysis as applicable for your component 

Mistakes to avoid: 

• • • Missing force/moment balance causes error

    • Wrong analysis case (nominal vs worst) 

    • Powered component not in analysis

    • Analysis is not maximum end ability

    • Analysis isn’t what was set out to analyze

      • Drivetrain: skip com considerations        

    • Uses max power instead of correct point on curve

[5 pts] Factor of.Safety calculation. Calculate the realized Factor of Safety of their component and interpret the value.

Part 3: Conclusions and Reflection [30 pts]

[10 pts] Discussion of differences in the team’s prototypes    

[20 pts] Give a clear reflection about :

• • The limitations of your design.

  • What is the next step to improve the design? 

  • Other design possibilities you would consider pursuing.

  • The most valuable lesson learned during completion of the project.

  • Feedback about the course structure for future virtually held classes.

Expanded Rules List

1. The course instructors reserve the right to make changes to the contest rules if deemed necessary, but we will try to avoid this if possible.

2. Judges and/or instructors will disqualify any device that appears to be a safety hazard.

3. A maximum set-up time of 2 minutes will be allowed for each round

4. Operators may interact with their machine during a round only through the release of a trigger (for example, once setup has finished you cannot hold up/aim your machine with your hands).

5. Paper footballs must be made to contest-legal specs, as outline here

6. It is allowable to adjust the configuration of the machine between matches; for example, to switch out damaged parts.

7. Parts built for the Risk Reduction prototype can be used in the final contest prototype only if those parts would normally be legal for the final contest (ie, if you used non-contest materials in your risk reduction, you can’t use your risk reduction parts in your contest prototype).

8. Glue and tape can only be used to join separate pieces together. Eg. they cannot be used to “mold” a structural element, or in some other creative, rule-bendy way.

9. Machine advertisements and decorations must be of the nature that it does not offend any other students or audience participants (use common sense!).

10. All rulings of the judges will be final.

11. The paper football must be touching the ground at the starting position. The orientation of the paper football is up to the team, but it must make contact with the ground.

12. In order to score a point, the paper football must pass between the uprights alone. For example, if some part of your prototype passes between the uprights, the point is invalidated (though judges can decide to be lenient if they feel it is a genuine accident).

Robot Contest Results from Spring, 2020

Complete Contest Pyramid and Results

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/19m6d_0-11BkN63Dckdgb_m7aMHojU4RM6K2vH2tAM7w/edit#gid=0

Contest Winners

Pretty Radical Tossing System

Most Valuable Prototype Award

 - Undecided - 

Most Innovative Prototype Award

 - Undecided - 

High Quality Presentation Award

 - Undecided -

High Quality Animation Awards

 - Undecided - 

High Quality Design Feature Award

 - Undecided -