Group 24 - Product Name Here
The focus of the project that our research group completed this past semester was based on the Tippmann 98 Custom model paintball marker. This marker is a non-lethal projectile device designed to look and feel like a firearm for the purposes of a competitive entertainment. The grouped looked into the design of the product, and the functions of the internal components. Each part was then analyzed and manufacturing methods were discussed and given reason. In the end, our group decided on some revisions that would be the marker more reasonable and marketable. In all, most of the revisions were aimed for better performance during use.
Gate 1; Our initial assessment of the product was that most all of the functions of the marker were in-line with one another via mechanical connections and energy transfers. It was clear that most all functions occurred within the housing of the marker, and that before opening the product, most components and actual functions were essentially conceptual. The clear design concerns were mainly in general performance, ease of use, societal appeal, and compatibility with parallel products. Much like automotive vehicles, it seemed as though the look of the marker held nearly as much if not more weight than the inner-components of the marker.
Gate 2; Upon dissecting the marker, our research team discovered the connections between subsystems and how the mechanics of the product function. Certain central part connections, as well as critical subsystems were identified with more precision than in our original assessment. The complexity of the parts and the interactions was assessed according to both qualitative and quantitative standards. The group gained an understanding of the inner-workings of the product, which gave crucial insight to the functional design of the marker.
Gate 3; To further our research of the marker, the group made a general profile of each part of the disassembled marker. The complexity of the parts and the interactions was assessed according to both qualitative and quantitative standards. The basic manufacturing process of each, though mainly theoretical, was documented, along with the function. Some vital components were set aside and evaluated further in order to gain a better understanding of the design of the marker and what design factors were involved. By analyzing the marker, we gained a better understanding of what kinds of analysis went into the original design of the product.
Gate 4; We reassembled the marker, paying great attention to detail within the product and lead us to discuss ideas about revising the marker. By understanding how the marker is put together, a final understanding of connections and flows was attained. Our group came to the conclusion that while material waste was a concern for the design for the marker, it seemed that most of the appeal of the product was in both its functionality and compatibility. For this reason, it seemed that the best direction for revision was in consumer appeal through the addition of functionality.
From our analysis of the Tippmann 98 Custom paintball marker, we assessed an in-place system and discussed what directions would be beneficial to take in terms of product revision. From this, the group gained knowledge of the importance behind system functionality and design processes. We were able to obtain practice in problem identification and in finding motives for improvement through the four common design factors. From this, the group gained an understanding of some common engineering techniques and practices.
Gate 1: Project Planning
-Preparation and Initial Assessment
Gate 2: Product Dissection
-Preliminary Project Review
Gate 3: Product Analysis
-Cause for Corrective Action
-Solid Model Assembly
Gate 4: Product Explanation
-Cause for Corrective Action