*Gate 5: Delivery

From GICL Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search



For the final phase in the reverse engineering project of design team five, the group finalized all of their previous phases of the project and prepared an oral presentation. They first revised all of their previously incorrect or insufficient information from prior gates. They then went on to ensure that all of the gates were completed to the best of the group’s abilities and that they each tied in as well as agreed with one another in a correct technical communication format. The design team then assessed one another in their performance throughout the reverse engineering project. The team then analyzed all of their work from the entire project in order to summarize their main findings. To end the entire Nerf N-Strike Longstrike CS-6 project, one group member presented one of the team’s design revisions to the Nerf gun in an oral presentation. This completed the final phase in the reverse engineering project of design team five.

Project Management Delivery

Involved in the finalization of the entire reverse engineering project, was editing the previously submitted phases and assessing the work contributions from each team member. When the design team revised their prior gates they took into account both comments made as well as where points were lost in order to ensure a correct and seamless technical report. The group also completed an evaluation form of one another in regards to their involvement and participation in the Nerf N-Strike Longstrike CS-6 project.

Finalization of Deliverables

For the finalization of the entire project, the design team worked together in order to make a list and then revise the previously submitted information for the Nerf gun. For Gates One, Two, and Three, the design team received a score of eighty-seven, ninety, and ninety-two respectively. When revising these gates, the design team not only revised sections where points were lost, but also used the comments in the graded outline to edit other sections accordingly. The following list shows what sections and subsections the design team lost points for in each gate, with the point total in parenthesis:

  • Gate 1: Project Planning
  • Overall
  • Report Structure: Project Outline
  • Introduce product (1)
  • Introduce project (1)
  • Project Management
  • Work Proposal: Dissection Plan
  • What skills need to be developed? (2)
  • Work Proposal: Supporting Information
  • Display timeline and order of tasks (1)
  • Consistency Issue (1)
  • Management Proposal: Member Roles
  • Point of contact? (1)
  • Product Archaeology
  • Development Profile: Requested Information
  • Key economic and global concerns at development? (2)
  • Energy Profile: Supporting Information
  • References (1)
  • Material Profile: Supporting Information
  • Supporting Imagery (1)
  • References (1)
  • User Interaction Profile: Supporting Information
  • References(1)
  • Gate 2: Project Dissection
  • Overall
  • Gate Structure: Section Outline
  • Missing Introduction of Gate (1)
  • Project Management
  • Corrective Action: Supporting Information
  • Lists, where appropriate (2)
  • Product Archaeology
  • Dissection: Dissection Documentation
  • Component Chart Versus Disassembly Steps? (1)
  • Dissection: Supporting Information
  • Use of alternative media where helpful (1)
  • Assessment: Ease of Disassembly
  • A difficulty scale id derived (factors defined and measurable) (1)
  • Assessment: Documentation of Subsystems
  • What subsystems are connected? (1)
  • How are the connections implemented? (1)
  • Assessment: Supporting Information
  • Supporting imagery for connections (functional model, block diagram, pictures with text/highlights, function-component matrix) (1)
  • Appropriate breakdown of discussion by subsystem or component for easy reading (1)
  • Gate 3: Project Analysis
  • Overall
  • Gate Structure: Section Outline
  • Missing Introduction of Gate (1)
  • Product Archaeology
  • Product Analysis: Product Analysis
  • Complexity Scale (1)
  • Product Analysis: Engineering Analysis
  • Analyzing Method? (2)
  • Product Analysis: Supporting Information
  • Appropriate breakdown of discussion (the formal analysis process would be an ideal format to follow) (1)
  • Product Analysis: Design Revisions
  • Economic impact of sniper stand (1)
  • Product Analysis: Supporting Information
  • Lack a bit of formatting (1)
  • References component summary when appropriate to justify the GSEE discussion (1)

Final Assessment

Each design team member of group five completed a separate, private assessment of the group’s performance on an individual contribution basis. It was then submitted with the final report.

Product Archaeology: Documentation

The design team's final step in their reverse engineering project, was to combine all of the previous gates along with the revisions into one technical report. This report was to contain an abstract summary documenting the material contained throughout the project and summarizes the major findings made by Group 5. The design team also had to prepare and present a presentation of the Nerf gun and its original design, as well as recommend a design revision that could be made to the product.

Technical Report

A final technical report was made by Group 5, documenting the process used to analyze the Nerf gun and the information that was gained throughout this process. The recommendations made for the improvement of the project planning, disassembly, and analysis have been addressed by the design team and corrected. After making these revisions, Group 5 then created an executive summary which gives a brief abstract to the material contained throughout the project report. This summary can be found on the Main Page of the project report.

Oral Presentation

The design team finished their last section of their reverse engineering project as one group member presented, to the class, one of the team’s design revisions to the Nerf N-Strike Longstrike CS-6. The design team decided on the Crank N-Nerf system design revision of Gate Four. The design team had team member, Sarah Selk, present the PowerPoint presentation of the ‘’Nerf N-Strike to the Crank N-Nerf.’’ The presentation involved the original design and functionality of the Nerf gun as well as the key factors that the design team considered for the redesign. The presenter then discussed the system redesign of the Cocking Bolt mechanism. This design revision was a mechanism change from a linear cam to a rack and pinion. The presentation also discussed the key global, societal, economic, and environmental concerns with the new redesign of the Nerf gun, which weren’t all positive influences. The final section of the presentation was considering factors that needed to be addressed if this redesign moved forward. Team members, Sarah Selk and Brianna Stewart, then gave a two minute question and answer section. The following slide images, “Nerf N-Strike to Crank N-Nerf,” show the PowerPoint presentation given as it concludes the reverse engineering project by design team five.

Nerf N-Strike to Crank N-Nerf : This slideshow is the PowerPoint Presentation given, in class, of the Crank N-Nerf system design revision. Note: The PowerPoint was turned into a slideshow with the use of Picasion [1].


[1] Picasion.(n.d.). Picasion: Create an Animated GIF. Retrieved December 5, 2012, from http://picasion.com/

Related Information

Main Page : Group 5 - Nerf N-Strike Longstrike CS-6

The Introduction : The Project Proposal

The Planning : *Gate 1: Project Planning

The Dissection : *Gate 2: Product Dissection

The Subsystems : *Gate 3: Product Analysis

The Reassembly : *Gate 4: Product Explanation