Soda gun
From DDL Wiki
(→Design for Environment (DFE)) |
|||
Line 749: | Line 749: | ||
|[[Image:T9S14_HoseCap.jpg|100x100px|center]] | |[[Image:T9S14_HoseCap.jpg|100x100px|center]] | ||
|- | |- | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | =Failure Mode and Effect Analysis [FMEA]= | ||
+ | |||
+ | We performed a Failure Mode and Effect Analysis on the soda gun. We considered individual parts, sub assemblies, and user interaction when conducting this analysis. The primary focus of this analysis is to identify the cause and effect of potential failure modes in our system. We began by gathering a list of parts and sub assemblies and different failure modes for each part. We then discussed the effects of each failure, the causes of each failure, and any design controls implemented to the part (if any). We scored the severity of failure (S), probability the failure occurs (P), and ease of detection (D) on a scale from 1-10 to determine an ultimate risk priority number (RPN). Parts with higher RPN are of highest priority when considering a redesign for a safer system. | ||
+ | {| class="wikitable" border="1" | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | ! '''Item and Function''' | ||
+ | ! '''Failure Mode''' | ||
+ | ! '''Effects of Failure''' | ||
+ | ! ''' S ''' | ||
+ | ! '''Causes of Failure''' | ||
+ | ! ''' O ''' | ||
+ | ! '''Design Controls''' | ||
+ | ! ''' D ''' | ||
+ | ! ''' RPN ''' | ||
+ | ! '''Recommended Actions''' | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | |||
+ | |- | ||
+ | | Toe Strap Clip: attachement for foot straps | ||
+ | | Fracture (snapped) | ||
+ | | Foot slips out/ distraction | ||
+ | | 2 | ||
+ | | Material not strong enoguh | ||
+ | | 7 | ||
+ | | Shorter than ground clearance to pedal | ||
+ | | 3 | ||
+ | | 42 | ||
+ | | Stronger Material or method of keeping pedal upright | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | |||
+ | |- | ||
+ | | Crank bearing set: allow for pedal rotation | ||
+ | | Dirty/ siezed | ||
+ | | Pedals rotation feels rough or is too hard for user | ||
+ | | 3 | ||
+ | | Contamination from dust/dirt, lack of lubrication, not properly preloaded | ||
+ | | 2 | ||
+ | | dust caps | ||
+ | | 4 | ||
+ | | 24 | ||
+ | | Use better sealed bearing set | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | |||
+ | |- | ||
+ | | Pedal bearing set | ||
+ | | Dirty/ siezed | ||
+ | | Pedal refuses to rotate independantly from crank arms/ bearings feel rough | ||
+ | | 3 | ||
+ | | Contamination from dust/dirt, lack of lubrication, not properly preloaded | ||
+ | | 2 | ||
+ | | End caps for pedal housing | ||
+ | | 4 | ||
+ | | 24 | ||
+ | | Sealed end caps | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | |||
+ | |- | ||
+ | | Foot grips: provide level and tractive surface to push | ||
+ | | Abraision, yeilding | ||
+ | | Pedal deforms | ||
+ | | 1 | ||
+ | | Impact with ground during operation | ||
+ | | 1 | ||
+ | | N/A | ||
+ | | 1 | ||
+ | | 1 | ||
+ | | N/A | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | |||
+ | |- | ||
+ | |Crank arm: transfer pedal rotation to crank/ add mechanical advantage | ||
+ | | Fracture (casting failure) | ||
+ | | Make bike unstable / rapid user weight transfer | ||
+ | | 8 | ||
+ | | Unexpected loading | ||
+ | | 1 | ||
+ | | N/A | ||
+ | | 8 | ||
+ | | 64 | ||
+ | | Inspect at the factory | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | |||
+ | |- | ||
+ | | Chain | ||
+ | | Oxidation / Fracture | ||
+ | | Cause chain to skip/ rapid user weight transfer / unsatisfactory appearance | ||
+ | | 8 | ||
+ | | Damage to chain, rust, lack of lubrication, incorrect tension | ||
+ | | 8 | ||
+ | | N/A | ||
+ | | 4 | ||
+ | | 256 | ||
+ | | Clear instructions on proper maintenance and easier chain tensioning | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | |||
+ | |- | ||
+ | | Rear hub bearing set | ||
+ | | Dirty/ siezed | ||
+ | | Wheel rotates with resistance/ seizes / bearings feel rough | ||
+ | | 3 | ||
+ | | Contamination from dust/dirt, lack of lubrication, not properly preloaded | ||
+ | | 2 | ||
+ | | N/A | ||
+ | | 4 | ||
+ | | 24 | ||
+ | | Better sealed beaings | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | |||
+ | |- | ||
+ | | Rear axle | ||
+ | | Loosening / yielding | ||
+ | | Wheel wobbles / detaches from bike | ||
+ | | 7 | ||
+ | | Lack of proper tension/torque on retaining lock nuts | ||
+ | | 3 | ||
+ | | N/A | ||
+ | | 6 | ||
+ | | 126 | ||
+ | | Make system more solidly mounted / seperate tensioning from wheel fixture | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | |||
+ | |- | ||
+ | | Rear hub | ||
+ | | Fracture | ||
+ | | Wheel fails | ||
+ | | 8 | ||
+ | | Manufacturing defects / unexpected loading (potholes) | ||
+ | | 1 | ||
+ | | N/A | ||
+ | | 9 | ||
+ | | 72 | ||
+ | | Make system more solidly mounted / seperate tensioning from wheel fixture | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | | Rear sprocket | ||
+ | | Wear / fatigue | ||
+ | | Teeth wear and allow chain slip | ||
+ | | 6 | ||
+ | | Wear from excessive use / lack of lubrication / lack of proper tension | ||
+ | | 4 | ||
+ | | N/A | ||
+ | | 3 | ||
+ | | 72 | ||
+ | | Strengthen sprocket material / clear instructions on proper maintenance and easier chain tensioning | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | |||
+ | |} |
Revision as of 23:39, 31 January 2014
Contents |
Executive Summary
Use Study
1. What are the stakeholder needs?
- What attributes does the user need for from the product? What attributes does the retailer have?
- The User/Bartender:
- This product will be principally used by bartenders at commercial food and drink establishments. This product allows for multiple soda types to be served at a quick pace with uniform accuracy. The user expects that the product will complete the task at hand, namely separating different soda type.
- Some key qualities that the bartender expects are:
- Responsive, fast serving when each button is pressed
- Easy to understand button configuration and operating procedures allowing for operation with little training and muscle memory
- Typically, these types of devices are built in an industry-standard layout.
- Any hoses or pumps must reach the full range of bar in case other employees need it
- It may be common for multiple bartenders and/or waiters to need access as well
- Easy to repair, easy to maintain, easy to clean
- Avoiding contamination issues will allow the establishment to be healthy and satisfy customer needs (no one wants a coke with orange soda residue in it)
- The user expects durable quality
- During peak hours, the gun may be thrown around, dropped etc.
- The user would like the product to be “Ergonometricly” friendly
- Over the course of a long shift, the user may hold and operate the gun for a long time
- Most products come with a holster that allows for storing and draining when the gun is not in use. The product must fit snugly in the holder to prevent any jostling, but also accessible enough to allow for easy removal and use, ideally with one hand.
- The Restaurant/Bar Owner:
- From the perspective of the owner, this product should be cheap to manufacture, require little maintenance, and be durable enough to last a long time after purchase. In many cases, the beverage company itself is responsible for the installation and maintenance of the gun, but if the owner can avoid these costs, he would be interested.
- The Retailer:
- The retailer of the gun wants the product to be aesthetically pleasing, which encourages customers to buy the gun and use it at their bar. He also expects the gun to be of high-quality to support his business, which may include water-resistance and consistent flow-rate. The gun should be as compact as possible while performing the task at hand to allow for easier shipping, and giving bars the greatest amount of room to operate in, without bulky equipment in the way. Finally, the retailer wants the product to be easily explained and easily integrate-able into a bar. This allows for easier sales and a more diverse customer base.
2. How the product works mechanically
- - Press a button, and it opens a valve connected to a type of soda. The gun then mixes carbonated water and the designated syrup and distributes the mixture into a cup.
- - The strength of the syrup in the mixture and what types of drinks are available are customizable and adjustable, allowing for the user to create a set up that best works for their demand and beverage company contracts.
3. How the product is used (step by step)
- (Set-Up)
- Learn which buttons go to each soda
- Pick up gun
- Point nozzle to cup
- Press appropriate button
- Fill to required level
- Re-holster gun
Design for Environment (DFE)
We found that the soda gun is optimized for multiple users to deliver a variety of soda drinks from the same location. In terms of functional optimizations, the soda gun could be made more ergonomic and more easily cleaned. These changes could improve the life of the gun and its ease of use. Individual parts can be optimized to take into account the degradable nature of the materials used, but the added cost of different materials could make environmentally friendly materials less practical to use or even more wasteful. Further, the packaging of the gun could be optimized to reduce waste and save on transportation costs. Seeing as the gun is usually bought in combination with other equipment, the total packaging and transportation costs would need to be examined for the purchased assembly as a whole. Finally, the parts can be made easily replaceable (especially the O-rings) which would prolong the life of the soda gun and cause less waste by allowing the gun to be reused instead of thrown away. This can be done by standardizing the part, making the gun easy to take apart with only simple tools, and providing consumers with easy-to-follow electronically-delivered repairing instructions.
EIOLCA - Economic input-output life cycle assessment
Production | Use | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Item purchased | Soda Gun System | Tap Water | Syrups | Electricity | CO2 |
(a) Picture | |||||
(b) Economic Sector # and Name | |||||
(c) Reference Unit | |||||
(d) Units Consumed per Product Life | |||||
(e) Cost per Unit ($ 2002) | |||||
(f) Lifetime Cost = (d)*(e) ($ 2002) | |||||
(g) Economy-wide mtCO2e released per $1M of output for sector (b) | |||||
(h) Implied mtCO2e released per Product Life = (g)*(f)/$1M | Text here | Text here | Text here | Text here | Text here |
(i) CO2 Tax @ $30/mtCO2e = $30*(h) | Text here | $ | $ | $ | $ |
(j) Assumptions |