Golf Ball Tracking and Locator System
Document 5: Concept Exploration
Initially Drafted: 10/11/2003
Intermediate Due Date: 10/15/2003
Completion Date: 12/10/2003
By:
Andreas, April
Bewtra, Ravi
Lease, David
Painter, Richard
Rusli, Melissa
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Guidelines and tips
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Golf Ball Tracking and Locator System: Figures of Merit Analysis, Exams of Engineering
A product report detailing the figures of merit analysis for various concepts of a golf ball tracking and locator system. The team, consisting of andreas, april, ravi bewtra, melissa rusli, richard painter, and david lease, evaluated concepts such as a noise-emitting ball, special glasses, video tracking system, rf inventory tag system, virtual golf simulation, golf lessons, and a combination pack. The analysis includes setup time, location time, reliability, balls found, non-interference, acquisition cost, and completion time.
Typology: Exams
Pre 2010
1 / 19
This page cannot be seen from the preview
Don't miss anything!
Related documents
Partial preview of the text
Download Golf Ball Tracking and Locator System: Figures of Merit Analysis and more Exams Engineering in PDF only on Docsity!
Golf Ball Tracking and Locator System
Document 5: Concept Exploration
Initially Drafted: 10/11/
Intermediate Due Date: 10/15/
Completion Date: 12/10/
By:
Andreas, April
Bewtra, Ravi
Lease, David
Painter, Richard
Rusli, Melissa
Fall 2003 Richard Painter, David Lease
Revisions
LN Date Description Team Member
1.) 10/11/2003 Doc 5 Created AKA
2.) 10/26/2003 Doc 5 – Revision 1 AKA
3.) 11/22/2003 Doc 5 – Revision 2 AKA
4.) 12/7/2003 Doc 5 – Revision 3 AKA
5.) 12/8/2003 Doc 5 – Revision 4 RCP
6.) 12/9/2003 Final Review AKA
Fall 2003 Richard Painter, David Lease
5.1. System Design Concepts
The system design concepts were focused on satisfying the customer’s need to
quickly locate a golf ball after it has been hit, so the game can continue without
significant interruption, and preventing the majority of penalty strokes.
5.1.1. System Design Concept 1
The GBTLS design 1 employs the use of several different kinds of golf balls
designed for specific situations. It is assumes the golfer will be skilled enough
to view the course ahead and be aware of certain kinds of traps (water, sand,
etc.) that are most likely to be encountered. This assumption is necessary to
ensure that the most appropriate ball is selected for the terrain. Each ball will be
labeled according to what kind of trap it is designed to be seen in.
An additional assumption is made that the particular feature that allows the ball
to be seen in the different terrains would not affect the balls performance,
weight, or balance.
Six balls would be available in this system:
Option 1: A standard white golf ball. A standard golf ball is used during
daylight hours while when no apparent risk of loss is present. This ball
would not require any maintenance or initialization before use.
Option 2: A standard purple- and yellow-striped golf ball. A striped golf
ball is used during daylight hours when the greatest risk of losing the
ball is getting it confused with the balls of other players. This ball
would not require any maintenance or initialization before use.
Option 3: A golf ball with a flashing LED. A golf ball with a flashing light
is used during daylight hours when there is a risk of losing the ball under
circumstances such as a long drive past or through woods, near tall
grass, or during dusk. This ball would be designed with technology that
turns the light on when shaken vigorously. Similar products are on the
market in pet toys, where any switches might bring a risk of swallowing
—here they bring a threat to aerodynamics. This design also has an
automatic shut-off so the golfer will not have to worry about forgetting
to disable the system and wear down the battery. This ball would not
require maintenance, but, depending on use, the ball would need to be
replaced when the battery runs out. The ball would also not require
initialization, since the act of hitting the ball with the golf club would
enable the system.
Option 4: A golf ball constructed to make a noise while in flight. A noise-
emitting ball is used during daylight hours to track the flight path of the
Fall 2003 Richard Painter, David Lease
ball. It can be used by golfers concerned about losing the ball
immediately after tee-off. The noise emitted comes from tiny holes
drilled into an otherwise-standard golf ball, which creates a whistling
effect while the ball flies through the air. The modifications to the ball
will have only a miniscule effect on the trajectory of the ball. This ball
would not require any maintenance or initialization before use.
Option 5: A golf ball that glows in the dark. A glow in the dark ball is used
after dusk to track the ball’s flight and location once on the ground. This
ball employs standard glow-in-the-dark technology used in most
children’s toys. This ball would not require any maintenance or
initialization before use.
Option 6: A golf ball that floats. A floating ball use used in daylight hours,
while playing near water hazards. This ball would not require any
maintenance or initialization before use.
The golfer will select a ball that fits the terrain, hit the ball, and them move to
the approximate location of the ball. After the ball is located, the golfer can
disable that particular ball, if necessary.
5.1.2. System Design Concept 2
System Design Concept 2 features the use of glasses that filter out blue light,
making it easier to find the ball. The golfer will hit a standard golf ball and then
move to the approximate location of the ball. The golfer will then put the
glasses over his or her eyes, and search visually for the ball. Once the ball is
located and retrieved, the golfer can remove the glasses. This system would not
require any maintenance or initialization before use.
5.1.3. System Design Concept 3
System Design Concept 3 uses a video tracking system that tracks and measures
the flight of the ball, including trajectory and velocity. The system would need
to be initialized prior to use, which includes pointing the optics down the
fairway, and setting up two tracking heads along each side of the fairway. After
the ball is hit, the golfer will move to the location provided by the system.
Once the system locates the ball, the system will need to be removed from the
fairway, and initialized again prior to the next stroke. Maintenance for this
system would involve replacing the batteries used in the system and cleaning
any relevant lenses, depending on usage.
Fall 2003 Richard Painter, David Lease
shots and will therefore be better able to predict where their ball has gone. The
golfer attends golf lessons and improves his or her performance. Using
improved skills, the golfer hits the ball so that it is more readily visible and
tracks its trajectory and final location.
The golfer continues taking lessons until either he or she no longer loses any
balls or gives up completely. This system is self-maintaining.
5.1.8. System Design Concept 8
System Design Concept 8 is a conglomeration of several of the previous
options. This system includes the six ball options from System Design Concept
1, the filter glasses from System Design Concept 2, and a version of the system
suggested by System Design Concept 7.
This system will be offered as a complete package, which will consist of the
following:
Part 1: Six Ball Options (Described in Detail Above):
A standard white golf ball.
A standard purple- and yellow-striped golf ball.
A golf ball with a flashing LED.
A golf ball constructed to make a noise while in flight.
A golf ball that glows in the dark.
A golf ball that floats.
Part 2: Glasses That Filter Out Blue Light (Described in Detail Above)
Part 3: Instructional Package. We will use the commercial off-the-shelf
product, Dalton McCrary’s “Straight Shootin’ Golf” package, which has
been one of the most commercially successful golf video training programs
on the market.
The concept behind golf lessons is described more fully in System Design
Concept 7. This particular package consists of the following items:
Four Instructional Videos
Written Manual
Practice Drills Pocket Guide—“Dalton’s Drills Pocket Guide”
This system is maintained as illustrated in the individual System Design
Concept descriptions above.
5.1.9. System Design Concept 9
System Design Concept 9 is to do nothing. No efforts will be made to improve
the tracking or location of the ball. Like always, the golfer will attempt to
Fall 2003 Richard Painter, David Lease
watch the trajectory of the ball after it is struck, move to the location of the ball,
if possible, and repeat the process throughout the round. This system does not
require any maintenance or initialization before use.
5.2. Figures of Merit
Figures of merit for all concepts were developed using the methods described in the
System Requirements document, based on the systems described in Documents 6
and 7.
During the calculation of the scores, we use the following naming conventions:
IW i P0 = weight for the i
th
figure of merit (I/O Performance)
ISF i P0 = score for the i
th
figure of merit (I/O Performance)
IFX i P0 = measured value the i
th
figure of merit (I/O Performance)
UW i P0 = weight for the i
th
figure of merit (Utilization of Resources)
USF i P0 = score for the i
th
figure of merit (Utilization of Resources)
UFX i P0 = measured value the i
th
figure of merit (Utilization of Resources)
The figures of merit are calculated using the formulas
IF0P0(FSD i ) = IW1P0 * ISF1P0 + … + IW m P0 * ISF m P
UF0P0(FSD i ) = UW1P0 * USF1P0 + … + UW n P0 * USF n P
where m is the number of I/O Performance Figures of Merit and n is the number of
resource figures of merit, and
ISF1P0 = IS1P0(IFX1P0(FSD i ))
USF1P0 = US1P0(UFX1P0(FSD i ))
where i is the concept design number.
5.2.1. Figures of Merit for Concept 1
IFX i P0 ISF i P0 IW i P
1 Setup Time 0.5 0.6 0.
2 Location Time 4.0 0.3 0.
3 Reliability 100.0 1.0 0.
4 Balls Found 94.0 0.2 0.
5 Non-interference 7.0 0.5 0.
Choice of Multiple Balls
Requirement
I/O Figures of Merit for Concept 1
IF0P0(FSD1)
For example, this table shows that on setup time, concept 1 had a measured
value of 0.5 minutes, which, using the scoring functions from the System
Requirements document, came to a score of 0.6. This was then multiplied by
the weight of the setup time requirement, 0.11429, to contribute to the total I/O
score for concept 1. That is,
Fall 2003 Richard Painter, David Lease
5.2.3. Figures of Merit for Concept 3
IFX i P0 ISF i P0 IW i P
1 Setup Time 7.0 0.0 0.
2 Location Time 2.5 0.6 0.
3 Reliability 2000.0 1.0 0.
4 Balls Found 99.0 0.8 0.
5 Non-interference 4.0 0.1 0.
Video Tracking System
Requirement
I/O Figures of Merit for Concept 3
IF0P0(FSD3)
UFX
i
P0 USF
i
P0 UW
i
P
1 Completion Time 0.0 0.0 0.
2 Acquisition Cost 0.1 0.0 0.
2.1 Acquisition Cost for 1 2000.0 0.0 0.
2.2 Acquisition Cost for 1,000 300.0 0.0 0.
2.3 Acquisition Cost for 1,000,000 50.0 0.6 0.
UF0P0(FSD3)
Requirement
U/R Figures of Merit for Concept 3
Video Tracking System
5.2.4. Figures of Merit for Concept 4
IFX i P0 ISF i P0 IW i P
1 Setup Time 0.5 0.6 0.
2 Location Time 2.0 0.7 0.
3 Reliability 100.0 1.0 0.
4 Balls Found 99.0 0.8 0.
5 Non-interference 7.0 0.5 0.
RF Inventory Tag System
Requirement
I/O Figures of Merit for Concept 4
IF0P0(FSD4)
UFX i P0 USF i P0 UW i P
1 Completion Time 1.0 0.5 0.
2 Acquisition Cost 1.0 1.0 0.
2.1 Acquisition Cost for 1 110.0 1.0 0.
2.2 Acquisition Cost for 1,000 32.0 1.0 0.
2.3 Acquisition Cost for 1,000,000 23.0 0.9 0.
UF0P0(FSD4)
Requirement
U/R Figures of Merit for Concept 4
RF Inventory Tag System
Fall 2003 Richard Painter, David Lease
5.2.5. Figures of Merit for Concept 5
IFX i P0 ISF i P0 IW i P
1 Setup Time 0.0 1.0 0.
2 Location Time 3.0 0.5 0.
3 Reliability 1E+14 1.0 0.
4 Balls Found 96.0 0.4 0.
5 Non-interference 6.0 0.3 0.
Human Location
Requirement
I/O Figures of Merit for Concept 5
IF0P0(FSD5)
UFX
i
P0 USF
i
P0 UW
i
P
1 Completion Time 10.0 1.0 0.
2 Acquisition Cost 0.3 0.1 0.
2.1 Acquisition Cost for 1 200.0 0.9 0.
2.2 Acquisition Cost for 1,000 200.0 0.1 0.
2.3 Acquisition Cost for 1,000,000 200.0 0.0 0.
UF0P0(FSD5)
Requirement
U/R Figures of Merit for Concept 5
Human Location
5.2.6. Figures of Merit for Concept 6
IFX i P0 ISF i P0 IW i P
1 Setup Time 2.0 0.3 0.
2 Location Time 0.0 1.0 0.
3 Reliability 2000.0 1.0 0.
4 Balls Found 100.0 1.0 0.
5 Non-interference 1.0 0.0 0.
Virtual Golf Simulation
Requirement
I/O Figures of Merit for Concept 6
IF0P0(FSD6)
UFX i P0 USF i P0 UW i P
1 Completion Time 0.0 0.0 0.
2 Acquisition Cost 0.2 0.0 0.
2.1 Acquisition Cost for 1 1000.0 0.3 0.
2.2 Acquisition Cost for 1,000 300.0 0.0 0.
2.3 Acquisition Cost for 1,000,000 100.0 0.1 0.
UF0P0(FSD6)
Requirement
U/R Figures of Merit for Concept 6
Virtual Golf Simulation
Fall 2003 Richard Painter, David Lease
5.2.9. Figures of Merit for Concept 9
IFX i P0 ISF i P0 IW i P
1 Setup Time 0.0 1.0 0.
2 Location Time 8.0 0.0 0.
3 Reliability 1E+14 1.0 0.
4 Balls Found 80.0 0.0 0.
5 Non-interference 10.0 1.0 0.
Do Nothing
Requirement
I/O Figures of Merit for Concept 9
IF0P0(FSD9)
UFX
i
P0 USF
i
P0 UW
i
P
1 Completion Time 10.0 1.0 0.
2 Acquisition Cost 1.0 1.0 0.
2.1 Acquisition Cost for 1 0.0 1.0 0.
2.2 Acquisition Cost for 1,000 0.0 1.0 0.
2.3 Acquisition Cost for 1,000,000 0.0 1.0 0.
UF0P0(FSD9)
Requirement
U/R Figures of Merit for Concept 9
Do Nothing
5.3. Trade-off Analysis
The overall performance and utilization of resources Figures of Merit are used to
calculate the trade-off scores for each option.
5.3.1. Educated Guess Trade-off Analysis
The scores for the trade off analysis will be computed by giving a weight of
50% to the I/O Performance scores and a weight of 50% to the Utilization of
Resources scores. The following formula will be used
TF0P0(FSD i ) = TW1P0 * IF0P0(FSD i ) + TW2P0 * F0P0(FSD i )
where TW1P0 = .5, TW2P0 = .5, and i represents the concept number.
Concept 1
TF0P0(FSD1) = TW1P0 * IF0P0(FSD1) + TW2P0 * F0P0(FSD1)
Concept 2
TF0P0(FSD2) = TW1P0 * IF0P0(FSD2) + TW2P0 * F0P0(FSD2)
Concept 3
TF0P0(FSD3) = TW1P0 * IF0P0(FSD3) + TW2P0 * F0P0(FSD3)
Fall 2003 Richard Painter, David Lease
Concept 4
TF0P0(FSD4) = TW1P0 * IF0P0(FSD4) + TW2P0 * F0P0(FSD4)
Concept 5
TF0P0(FSD5) = TW1P0 * IF0P0(FSD5) + TW2P0 * F0P0(FSD5)
Concept 6
TF0P0(FSD6) = TW1P0 * IF0P0(FSD6) + TW2P0 * F0P0(FSD6)
Concept 7
TF0P0(FSD7) = TW1P0 * IF0P0(FSD7) + TW2P0 * F0P0(FSD7)
Concept 8
TF0P0(FSD8) = TW1P0 * IF0P0(FSD8) + TW2P0 * F0P0(FSD8)
Concept 9
TF0P0(FSD9) = TW1P0 * IF0P0(FSD9) + TW2P0 * F0P0(FSD9)
5.3.2. Educated Guess Alternatives
The alternative with the highest score is Concept 8 (Combination Pack),
followed closely by Concept 7 (Golf Lessons), and then by Concept 4 (RF
Inventory Tag System).
5.4. Sensitivity Analysis
5.4.1. Sensitivity Due to Weighting Criteria
The current weighting system puts equal emphasis on I/O performance and U/R
performance. A sensitivity analysis was performed to determine the
significance of the weights placed on the performances, the results of which are
shown in the graph below.
Fall 2003 Richard Painter, David Lease
To conduct a sensitivity study on the Non-Interference importance value, the
value was varied from 3 to 10. The I/O and U/R weights were left at .5 each, as
they were in the formal trade study. The results of this sensitivity analysis are
shown below.
Scores Sensitivity Based on Non-Interference Importance
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Non-Interference Importance Value
Total Concept Score
Choice of Multiple Balls
Special Glasses
Video Tracking System
RF Inventory Tag System
Human Location
Virtual Golf Simulation
Golf Lessons
Combination Pack
Do Nothing
It can be seen that once the importance value of non-interference is increased to
about 9, Concept 8 (Combination Pack) yields to Concept 7 (Golf Lessons) as
the highest scoring option. However, the non-interference probably does not
need a score as high as 9, since our customer placed much more emphasis on
actually locating the ball.
Similar importance value sensitivity analyses were performed on the other I/O
importance scores. For example, the percentage of balls found importance was
varied also from 3 to 10, giving the following:
Fall 2003 Richard Painter, David Lease
Scores Sensitivity Based on % Balls Recovered Importance
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
% Balls Recovered Importance Value
Total Concept Score
Choice of Multiple Balls
Special Glasses
Video Tracking System
RF Inventory Tag System
Human Location
Virtual Golf Simulation
Golf Lessons
Combination Pack
Do Nothing