Project Plan

Deliverables

Thus far, the group has already completed and submitted deliverables for both Phase I and Phase II. Phase I required both a written report and a presentation from the group, and Phase II only required a presentation. At Phase I, the group had completed research and rough design consideration. Through the feedback from the Phase I deliverables, the group further emphasized the concept selection and providing details of the design more clearly. With this, the group finished the presentation deliverable for Phase II which included CAD models and a technical analysis. Feedback for that deliverable included incorporating more dimensions in the CAD models as well as providing more detail to the technical analysis. Since then, the group has enhanced both aspects and went on to create CAD simulations and alpha prototypes. This current report is a deliverable for Phase III and the group will create a presentation for Phase III as well. Any feedback provided will be incorporated to enhance the design of the sorter for Phase IV where the group will also plan to incorporate further alpha prototyping and fabrication plans for the final design. Finally, the group will spend Phase V creating beta prototypes and the final design. Both Phases IV and V will include deliverables that will help to guide the group through these phases. Finally, for Phase VI, the group will submit a final presentation and display the product at the Innovation Expo in the spring. These will be the final deliverables for the team and signify the end of the project’s development. Since Phase II and continuing throughout the rest of the phases, the group has created and will be updating a website that includes the progress the group has made. The website itself will be fully completed with the group’s progress at the end of Phase VI with the product.

Gantt Chart

The Gantt Chart is what is used to organize the team’s workflow and plan who needs to do what and when it has to be done. It is broken up into six phases, the first three being this semester and the last three being the spring semester. Only the first three phases are currently implemented into the Gantt Chart because the group does not yet have enough information about Phase IV, V and VI to plan them out effectively. Phase I was all about the proposal and conceptual design. This involved stakeholder meetings, defining the needs and specifications, generating and selecting concepts, and obtaining a rough idea of the budget and engineering involved. Phase II was about technical analysis. This phase involved creating a website for the project and further included creating a CAD model of the proposed design, finding the mechanical, electrical, and computational objectives and figuring out the mathematical ways to overcome them, and simulating the design for testing. The group is currently in Phase III, which is about engineering design. This involves a complete technical analysis, simulation testing, updating the design and ordering parts, and determining the physical tests that will be run on the prototype. The Gantt Chart for this project can be found in the appendix. The Gantt Chart will be updated to include Phases IV, V and VI once the spring semester starts as the group will obtain more information about these phases and the plans required to complete the work. The link to the team's most up-to-date Gantt Chart is above.

Budget

All groups were given a maximum budget of $700 to accommodate purchasing materials and resources necessary for all the groups to complete research and development as well as prototype construction. Given the small scale of the group’s project, it is unlikely that the group will need to utilize the maximum budget throughout the project’s entirety. As mentioned in the previous report, the group was supplied with a sample of the MINDSTORM EV3 kit from Professor Fontaine which aided in alpha prototyping. This also meant that the group did not have to allocate any of the budget to obtain sample parts for testing purposes. Since Phase I, the group has begun spending some of the budget on the construction of alpha prototyping. Since two alpha prototypes were constructed, the group had to purchase materials for their construction and testing. To reduce the cost of the alpha prototypes, the group made use of different materials than those planned for the final product. Instead of thick wood, the models were constructed of mostly cardboard which is cheaper and easier to replenish. Furthermore, the motors that were purchased for the prototypes could be repurposed for the final product which further saves on expenditures. The vibration motors are easily reusable but the group may purchase a stronger motor for the incline and conveyor movements of the final design. The update budget above depicts the currently updated budget that includes both purchase for the alpha prototypes and the potential costs of the final design. The most expensive aspect of the project is no longer the deep-learning camera since it was determined a cheaper alternative would result in the same functionality and the deep-learning capabilities of the camera itself were deemed unnecessary. Although the totaled budget has increased since Phase II, the material changes were swapped toward cheaper options. For instance, the skeleton of the sorter was changed to wood rather than metal which is significantly cheaper. Secondly, the implementation of vibration motors rather than only rotational motors further reduces the price. The budget only increased from new materials that were not originally considered during the earlier phases. The current budget is fully up to date with all potential materials the group expects to utilize. In total, the budget has decreased to $404.41 which is still under the $700 maximum and provides the group with room for updates to the bill of materials. A link to the team's most up-to-date budget is above.