Lesson 1

When creating the initial budget the team researched prices of bulk materials and online supplies. However, it was opted to buy the components by unit and in local stores. After the final mechanical design, a second purchase order was needed because the number of bolts, washers, and nuts had increased. At that moment, the team realized that the first decision was wrong. Material costs increased considerably by not buying fastening components in bulk. Luckily, the project was able to save money with other components. Figure 24 illustrates the values of a package with 50 units of M6 nut. Figure 25 shows the cost paid by 25 units of M6 nuts in a local Hardware Store.

Lesson 2

The project had team members responsible for individual tasks, but since it is a group project in various tasks we decided to have all team members present to perform the tasks. All team members were working together on quotation, evaluation, purchasing, electrical assembly, and mechanical assembly. If the idea of one person for each above-mentioned task was followed, the project could have achieved cost reduction.

Lesson 3

When Gantt Chart was created the project did not have a contingency budget for individual phases. The Gantt chart did not consider other course deadlines, quizzes, and tests happening around and even on the same days as task due dates. The Project Manager advisor, Professor Volkening, pointed out that some contingency hours should be added to the Gantt chart. By doing so the project remained between acceptable limits at the end of the design and assembly phases. The project fell slightly behind schedule due to two reasons. The first was when the creation of prototype drawings took more time than planned. The second was when conflict with other courses deadlines occurred.

Lesson 4

In a project, the tasks happening at the moment are a priority. However, looking for what should happen in the following weeks is also critical. The project followed the Gantt Chart perfectly until the fabrication phase. A considerable delay happened during the machining parts task. Initially, only one week was considered for this task. However, this phase lasted 4 weeks due to not booking the machine shop earlier and schedule conflicts between classes and machine shop availability. This delay forced the team to anticipate future tasks to keep the project going while mechanical parts were not ready for assembly. Programming next week’s work is crucial to avoid delays that can potentially destroy the credibility of a project. 

Ray

Lesson 1

The technical issue that Ray encountered while doing this project was that some of the chain pins snapped while inserted into the chain link. This happened due to design incompatibility with the material used. He learned that the material strength varies when he changes the original material from aluminum to nylon while keeping the same design. Therefore, a modification in the design had to be done (Figure 26). To prevent such issues in the future, it is important to consider the material type and strength before finalizing the design. 

Lesson 2

The second technical issue that Ray encountered was when the individual parts were directly assembled as one in SolidWorks. Whenever he added a new part to the assembly, some parts shifted direction instead of staying in place. He learned that for some reason when multiple parts are put together in one assembly, the joints that connect one part to another affect its structure by causing it to shift direction. Therefore, to avoid this kind of issue he made a solution to make multiple sub-assemblies with only a few parts and those sub-assemblies will be put together as one assembly (Figure 27).