Golf Ball Tracking and Locator System
Process Document 5: Concept Exploration
Initially Drafted: 10/11/2003
Intermediate Due Date: 12/9/2003
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: Process Document 5 - Concept Exploration - Prof. T., Study Guides, Projects, Research of Engineering
The concept exploration phase of a project to design a golf ball tracking and locator system. The team considered three process concepts: cooperative teamwork, anarchy, and do nothing. The figures of merit for each concept are provided, along with trade-off analysis and sensitivity analysis results.
Typology: Study Guides, Projects, Research
Pre 2010
1 / 6
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: Process Document 5 - Concept Exploration - Prof. T. and more Study Guides, Projects, Research Engineering in PDF only on Docsity!
Golf Ball Tracking and Locator System
Process Document 5: Concept Exploration
Initially Drafted: 10/11/ Intermediate Due Date: 12/9/ 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.) 12/7/2002 Doc 5 – Revision 3 AKA 5.) 12/8/2003 Doc 5 – Revision 4 RCP 6.) 12/9/2003 Process Document Drafted RKB 7.) 12/9/2003 Final Review AKA
Fall 2003 Richard Painter, David Lease 5.1 System Design Concepts The system design concepts were focused on different ways of organizing the team, and how best to organize the task structurally. 5.1.1 Process Concept 1 Process Concept 1 is Cooperative Teamwork. The team will set internal deadlines to design a system and create the documentation and implementation plans. The team will use resources such as Dr. Bahill and the Teaching Assistant to gain knowledge and learn more about ISO-499 and the principles of systems engineering. 5.1.2 Process Concept 2 Process Concept 2 is Anarchy. The students in the group will each guess what the other team members are working on, and contribute whichever documents he or she feels the inclination to provide. The day before the documents are due, a quick check will be made to see which documents are done. Whichever documents are not finished will be shrugged off as “unimportant.” 5.1.3 Process Concept 3 Process Concept 3 is Do Nothing. The team members will not work together, nor will they produce anything to turn in. 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 ISF i P0 = score for the i th^ figure of merit IFX i P0 = measured value the i th^ figure of merit The figures of merit are calculated using the formulas IF0P0(FSD i ) = IW1P0 * ISF1P0 + … + IW m P0 * ISF m P where m is the number of Performance Figures of Merit and n is the number of resource figures of merit, and ISF1P0 = IS1P0(IFX1P0(FSD i )) where i is the concept design number.
Fall 2003 Richard Painter, David Lease 5.2.1 Figures of Merit for Concept 1 IFX i P0 ISF i P0 IW i P 1 Completion Time 5.3 0.5 0. 2 Quality of Work 98.0 0.7 0. 3 Development Cost 60.0 0.9 0. 0. Teamwork Requirement Figures of Merit for Concept 1 IF0P0(FSD1) 5.2.2 Figures of Merit for Concept 2 IFX i P0 ISF i P0 IW i P 1 Completion Time 6.0 0.0 0. 2 Quality of Work 75.0 0.0 0. 3 Development Cost 55.0 1.0 0. IF0P0(FSD2) 0. Anarchy Requirement Figures of Merit for Concept 2 5.2.3 Figures of Merit for Concept 3 IFX i P0 ISF i P0 IW i P 1 Completion Time 9999.0 0.0 0. 2 Quality of Work 0.0 0.0 0. 3 Development Cost 0.0 1.0 0. IF0P0(FSD3) 0. Do Nothing Requirement Figures of Merit for Concept 3 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. Concept Score Rank Teamwork 0.288 1 Anarchy 0.160 3 Do Nothing 0.167 2 The Concept of Teamwork scores much higher of the three options. Do nothing actually scores higher than anarchy because even though it produces basically nothing, it is free. Essentially, this shows that putting forth very little effort is essentially the same as (and sometime worse than!) putting forward no effort at all.