Laporan Transporter

Nomor Dokumen: KU1201-01-2014.xx.
yy Nomor Revisi: 01 Tanggal: 9/25/2014 Halaman 1 dari 13

2014 Program Studi Teknik Elektro STEI ITB, Program TPB - PRD Cluster 1 FMIPA STEI.

PENGANTAR REKAYASA DAN DESAIN
CLUSTER 1 FMIPA STEI
PROGRAM TPB - ITB

Judul Dokumen DESAIN ROBOT LEGO MINDSTORM:
Transporter Robot

Jenis Dokumen LAPORAN DESAIN KOMPETISI

Nomor Dokumen KU1201- Clust01-2014.05.01

Nomor Revisi Versi 01

Nama File laporan prd-transporter.docx

Tanggal Penerbitan 10 Mei 2014

Unit Penerbit PRD Cluster 1 - FMIPA STEI ITB

Jumlah Halaman <jumlah halaman>
(termasuk lembar sampul ini)

Kelas: 05 Kelompok: 01

CLUSTER 1
FMIPA STEI
Ditulis Nama/NIM: Alkhansa Rodhiyah 16013140
Oleh:
Nama/NIM: Naufal Ramadhan Pribadi 16013160
Nama/NIM: Falah Fakhruddin 16013180
Nama/NIM: Rizki Nur Fitriansyah 16013195
Nama/NIM: Levina Michella 16013260
Nama/NIM: Putri Oktiaviani 16013265
Nama/NIM: Indra Karno Adi 16013270
Nama/NIM: Muhammad Ridho 16013275 Tanda tangan ketua:
Nama/NIM: Nevila Nur Faiz 16013310

Tanggal 9 Mei 2014
KU1201 PENGANTAR REKAYASA DAN DESAIN 2
Nomor Dokumen: KU1201-01-2014.xx.yy Nomor Revisi: 01 Tanggal: 9/25/2014 Halaman 2 dari 13

DAFTAR ISI


LIST OF INDIVIDUAL CONTRIBUTIONS

NAMA KONTRIBUSI DALAM KELOMPOK


<Tuliskan judul: Desain Robot apa>
1 Pengantar
1.1 RINGKASAN ISI DOKUMEN
Dokumen ini membahas konsep dan gagasan dari kegiatan desain robot yang
berjudul .............. Uraian dalam dokumen ini mencakup identifikasi masalah, deskripsi
kebutuhan desain dan penentuan spesifikasi, pemaparan desain konseptual yang mencakup
penentuan konsep-konsep alternatif, evaluasi alternatif dan pemilihan konsep. Kemudian
dilanjutkan dengan pemaparan desain rinci dan implementasi, pengujian, analisis dan
pengambilan kesimpulan (lihat chapter 25 buku teks Kosky).
Hasil desain diimplementasikan menggunakan platform Lego Mindstorms EV3, dan
dikompetisikan pada akhir perkuliahan KU1201 Pengantar Rekayasa dan Desain 2. <dst
tuliskan informasi lain yang dianggap perlu>
1.2 Tujuan Penulisan dan Aplikasi/Kegunaan Dokumen
Dokumen ini ditulis sebagai pemenuhan syarat kelulusan mata kuliah KU1201
Pengantar Rekayasa dan Desain 2.
1.3 REFERENSI
1. Kosky, Philip. Et.al. Exploring Engineering, An Introduction to Engineering and
Design, Elsevier Inc., 2010.
2. <isi dengan referensi lainnya>
1.4 DAFTAR SINGKATAN
SINGKATAN ARTI
PRD Pengantar Rekayasa dan Desain
LME Lego Mindstorms Education
<tuliskan daftar singkatan lainnya yang digunakan pada dokumen>

2 IDENTIFIKASI MASALAH (DEFINING THE PROBLEM)
Pada bagian ini dijabarkan latar belakang, tujuan dan rumusan masalah ...... yang menjadi
dasar dibangunnnya robot untuk aplikasi ..... dengan kemampuan ...... <dst>. Kebutuhan
yang terdapat dalam masyarakat, atau kebutuhan customer, diterjemahkan dalam besaran
enjiniring. Hasilnya berupa definisi masalah (problem definition) dan daftar spesifikasi
(list of specifications). <silakan ganti paragraf ini dengan bahasa anda sendiri>

2.1 DEFINISI MASALAH (PROBLEM DEFINITION)
A problem definition states the design objective in one to three clear, concise sentences.
For example, the problem definition addressed by Orville and Wilbur Wright at the turn of
the twentieth century was design a manned machine capable of achieving powered flight.
This problem definition tells us that they wanted to design a flying machine subject to two

constraints. First, it must carry a person, which rules out model aircraft. Second, an
onboard power source must be used to take off, which eliminates the possibilities of
leaping off a barn with hand-held wings and lighter-than-air craft such as a hot air balloon.
The problem definition is constructed in response to an expressed need. Failure to identify,
understand, and validate the need prior to designing, is one of the most frequent causes of
failure of the entire design process. The customers statement of need does not typically
take the form of a problem definition. For example,
consider the following statement of need from a fictitious client:
Need: People who work at the Empire State Building are complaining about the long waits
at the elevator. This situation must be remedied.
An engineer might translate this need into the following problem definition:
Problem Definition: Design a new elevator for the Empire State Building.
Is this really a good problem definition? Is the main concern of the management at the
Empire State Building to reduce average waiting times or to eliminate the complaints?
When turning an expressed need into a problem definition, it is important to eliminate
assumptions that unfairly bias the design toward a par- ticular solution. A better, less-
biased problem definition might be:
Improved Problem Definition: Increase customer satisfaction with the elevators in the
Empire State Building.

2.2 SPESIFIKASI (LIST OF SPECIFICATIONS)

After translating the need into a problem definition, the next step is to prepare a list of
specifications. The list of specifications includes both demanded design characteristics
that must be present for the design to be considered acceptable and wished for design
characteristics that are desirable but not crucial to the success of the final design. It is the
usual practice to classify each specification as either a demand (D) or a wish (W). Dont
confuse the two. If you treat a wish as if it was a demand, your design may become more
complicated than is necessary.
Whenever possible, use numbers to express specifications. For example, instead of merely
requiring that weight must be low, state, Weight must be less than 10 pounds.
Sometimes use of numbers is impossible. A quality such as aesthetically pleasing is
difficult to quantify. However, use numbers wherever possible, even if at this early stage
they seem like guesses. The numbers can be refined later as the design begins to take
shape.
The specifications should be solution independent to avoid bias. For example, if you are
designing a small mobile device, requiring that the wheels must be made of rubber will
bias the design in two respects: in the use of wheels and in the choice of materials. Such
decisions are reserved for later in the design process after careful consideration of
alternatives.

Specifications come in the following categories:
Performance
Geometry
Materials
Energy
Time
Cost
Manufacture
Standards
Safety
Transport
Ergonomics
These categories can also be used as headings by which to organize the list of
specifications.

3 ALTERNATIF KONSEP (GENERATION OF ALTERNATIVE
CONCEPTS)

Once the problem statement is in place, and the specifications have been listed, it is time
to generate alternative concepts. By a concept, we mean an idea as opposed to a detailed
design. The representation of the concept, usually in the form of a sketch, contains enough
information to understand how the concept works but not enough information to build it.
By alternative, we are requiring that the various proposed ideas must be fundamentally
different in some way. The differences must go beyond appearance or dimensions. The
usual rule of thumb in design courses is to generate at least three fundamentally different
concepts. This part will be discussed: brainstorming, concept sketching, functional
decomposition.
3.1 BRAINSTORMING
The most common approach for generating ideas is by brainstorming. As the term implies,
you rely on your own creativity and memory of past experiences to produce ideas.
Usually, team members will generate ideas on their own before meeting with the team for
a brainstorming session.
Brainstorming is based on one crucial rule: criticism of ideas is not allowed. This enables
each team member to put forth ideas without fear of immediate rejection. For example, a
professor once recorded the brainstorming session of a small team of students. At one
point, a student offered an idea, and another student referred to it as stupid. The voice of
the first student was never heard from again during the session. Instead of a team of four,
it had become a team of three.
It is important to devote some of the brainstorming time searching for bold,
unconventional ideas. In the case of a design competition, this could mean searching for
holes in the rules that could lead to ideas that the creators of the competition had not
anticipated.

Only when brainstorming is complete should the team eliminate concepts that are not
feasible, not legal, or not fundamentally different. After this weeding-out process, at least
three concepts should remain. If not, more brainstorming is in order.

3.2 CONCEPT SKETCHING

For an idea to be considered a feasible alternative concept, it must be represented in the
form of a conceptual sketch. The goal in producing a concept drawing is to convey what
the design is and how it works in the clear- est possible terms. Any lack of clarity, such as
failure to represent one of the subfunctions, will translate into doubts about the feasibility
of the concept when it comes time to evaluate it.
At the same time, however, this is not a detailed design drawing. Dimensions and other
details not relevant to understanding the basic nature of how the concept will work are left
out.
It is best to proceed through two phases when generating a concept drawing. First, in the
creative phase, hand- sketching is done freestyle and quickly, without regard for neatness
or visual clarity. A few simple lines, incompre- hensible to others, might be enough to
remind you of your idea. Sketching is a means for both storing ideas and brainstorming
others. The final outcome is a rough sketch of the concept. Second, in the documentation
phase, the concept is neatly redrawn and labeled to facilitate communication with team
members and project sponsors.
The final outcome is one or more sketches prepared with the following guidelines in mind:
Can be hand-sketched or computer-generated.
No dimensions. Remember, this is not a detailed drawing.
Label parts and main features. If the drawing is hand-sketched, handwritten
labeling is acceptable.
Provide multiple views and/or close-up views if needed to describe how the design
works.

3.3 FUNCTIONAL DECOMPOSITION

When confronted with a complex problem, it is frequently advantageous to break it
down into smaller, sim- pler, more manageable parts. In the case of design, those
smaller parts usually correspond to the individual functions (or tasks) that must be
performed in order to achieve the overall design objective. This approach, known
as functional decomposition, is the basis of the procedure described as follows for
generating concept alternatives.
Step 1. Decompose the design objective into a series of functions. Start out by
decomposing the overall function into four or five subfunctions. Usually, verbs
such as move, lift, and control are used in naming the functions.

Step 2. Brainstorm on alternative concepts for each function and assemble the
results in a classification scheme.
Step 3. Combine function concepts to form alternative design concepts. Table
19.2 demonstrates how one subfunction concept from each row of the classification
scheme is selected to form a total concept. The same subfunction concept can be
used with more than one total concept, though keep in mind that the idea is to
generate fundamentally different design concepts. The only other rule when
deciding upon the best combinations is to be sure that the subfunction concepts
being combined are compatible.
Step 4. Sketch each of the most promising combinations. This is done in
accordance with the rules previously presented for concept drawings. Remember
that you must end up with drawings for at least three fundamentally different design
concepts.

4 EVALUASI ALTERNATIF DAN PEMILIHAN KONSEP
(EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVES AND SELECTION OF
CONCEPT)

Suppose you now have generated three concepts that will meet the problem definition and
fulfill the specifications. Which one should you choose as the basis for your final design?
There is no magic formula. However, Professor Nam P. Suh of MIT has provided two
very helpful design principles for evaluating and improving concepts: minimize
information content and maintain the independence of functional requirements.
Then there are three additional considerations for evaluating alternatives: ease of
manufacture, robustness, and design for adjustability. It then concludes with a method of
pulling together all these ideas: the decision matrix.

4.1 EVALUATING ALTERNATIVES

This part describe the evaluating alternatives process using considerations: minimize
information content, maintain the independence of functional requirements, ease of
manufacture, robustness, and design for adjustability.

4.2 THE DECISION MATRIX

The decision matrix promotes a systematic and exhaustive examination of concept
strengths and weaknesses. The entire procedure, from selection of evaluation criteria to
filling out the matrix, is designed to remove per- sonal bias from the decision-making

process. The results give a numerical measure for ranking alternatives and ultimately
selecting the best concept.
EVALUATION CRITERIA
The criteria by which the concepts should be judged are all contained in the list of
specifications. To even qualify as a feasible concept, the expectation must be that all the
design requirements designated as demands will be satisfied. Therefore, the ranking of the
feasible concepts ultimately depends on the degree to which they fulfill the design
requirements designated as wishes. However, at the conceptual level, qualities associated
with both demands and wishes are included among the evaluation criteria owing to the
uncertainty still associated with estimating their degree of fulfillment.
The design requirements selected to serve as evaluation criteria usually are reworded to
indicate the desired quality. For example, instead of weight, cost, and manufacture, the
corresponding evaluation criteria become low weight, low cost, and easy to manufacture.
Evaluation criteria should be independent of each other to ensure a fair weighting of
requirements in the decision matrix discussed later. For example, low cost and ease of
manufacture will be redundant and thus double counted if cost of labor is a significant
fraction of total cost.
The number of evaluation criteria can vary depending on the situation. We suggest a level
of detail con- sistent with the amount of detailed information available about the concept.
For most hands-on student projects, five to seven of the most important evaluation
criteria should suffice. Easy to manufacture and low cost are almost always included in
this list.

PROCEDURE FOR FILLING OUT A DECISION MATRIX
Step 1. Identify the evaluation criteria. This step is described in the previous section.
Step 2. Weigh the evaluation criteria. Weight values are assigned to each evaluation
criterion in proportion to its relative importance to the overall success of the design; the
larger the weight, the more important the evaluation criterion.
Step 3. Set up the decision matrix. The names of the concepts being evaluated are filled
in at the top of each column. Likewise, the evaluation criteria and their assigned weights
are written in the leftmost columns of the matrix. Scoring and intermediate calculations
will be recorded within the subcolumns under each concept and then totaled at the bottom
of the matrix.
Step 4. Assign values to each concept. Starting in the first row, each concept is assigned
a value between 0 and 10 according to how well it satisfies the evaluation criterion under
consideration.
Step 5. Calculate overall value for each concept. For each concept-criterion
combination, the product of the weight and the value is calculated and then recorded in the
second subcolumn.

Step 6. Interpret the results. The highest overall value provides an indication of which
design is best. Overall values that are very close in magnitude should be regarded as
indicating parity given the uncertainty that went into assignment of weights and values.
The final result is nonbinding. Thus, there is no need to bias the ratings so as to obtain the
hoped for final result. Rather, the chart should be regarded as a tool aimed at fostering an
exhaustive discussion of strengths and weaknesses.

5 DESAIN RINCI (DETAILED DESIGN)

The goal of this step in the design process is to specify the details of the design so that it
can be manufactured. Those details are typically the dimensions and material composition
of parts, as well as the methods used to join them. The decisions made during detailed
design are guided by analysis, experiments, and models to reduce the risk that additional
design changes will be needed later. The final results are documented in the form of
detailed drawings.

5.1 ANALYSIS

Analysis refers to the application of mathematical models to predict performance. The role
of analysis in freshman design projects is limited because the analytical capabilities of an
engineering student are just starting to develop. One calculation that may prove to be
useful for small electromechanical devices is the determination of the optimal gear ratio.
In developing this mathematical model we will draw from the equations on gearing and
gear ratios.

5.2 EXPERIMENTS

Physical experiments are a particularly effective way to reduce risk when working with
small electromechanical systems. Because of the small scale, materials needed for the
experiments can probably be scavenged, or at least obtained at low cost, and realistic
forces can easily be applied. Also, physical experiments are often more accurate than
idealized mathematical models at this scale.
Since the actual design has not been built yet, the subfunction being investigated may have
to be idealized for the purposes of the experiment. For example, you might use cheaper
materials or use your hands to create the motion. The errors introduced by these
approximations will be tolerable if they are much smaller than the changes in performance
being observed.
Knowing when to use experiments requires a keen awareness of the sources of risk in a
design. This is no time for overconfidence; you can safely assume that if something can go
wrong, it will. Thus, it is vital that you be able to distinguish between the aspects of the
design about which you are sure and those about which you are not so sure. The latter are

candidates for physical experiments.
The steps for formulating an experimental plan are as follows:
1. Identify aspects of the design and its performance about which you are uncertain.
2. Associate the aspects in step 1 with one or more physical variables that can be
varied by means of simple experiments.
3. Carry out the experiments that will do the most to reduce risk within the available
time frame.
4. If possible, document the results in the form of graphs or tables.

5.3 MODELS

Models are scaled replicas constructed out of inexpensive, readily available materials. In
the case of small electromechanical devices, they often are constructed out of cardboard or
foam board. Models are used to check geometric compatibility, establish key dimensions
of moving parts, and to visualize the overall motion.

5.4 DETAILED DRAWING

By definition, a detailed drawing will contain all the information required to manufacture
the design. The drawings should be so complete that if you handed them off to someone
unfamiliar with the design, that person would be able to build it.
The usual practice is to specify dimensions on multiple orthogonal views of the design. An
isometric view sometimes also is provided to assist with visualization. In all, six
orthogonal views are possible: front, back, left, right, top, and bottom. Three views,
however, are most common.
Additional information such as material specification, part type, and assembly directions
are conveyed through written notes on the drawings. Close-up views can be employed to
clarify small features.
Although practicing engineers will generate drawings using computer-aided design (CAD)
software, first-year engineering students probably have not taken a CAD course yet.
Therefore, we recommend that the usual standards for preparation of detailed drawings
should be relaxed somewhat and replaced by the following set of guidelines:
Drawings can be neatly hand drawn using ruler and compass.
Drawings must be drawn to scale, though not necessarily full-scale.
Drawings of at least two orthogonal views of the design should be prepared. An
isometric view is not required, but close-up views should be used to clarify small
features.
Show hidden lines only when they will enhance clarity. These are dashed lines that
are used to show edges that are not visible from the viewers perspective.
It is acceptable to show only essential dimensionsthat is, key dimensions that
either have a direct impact on performance or are needed to demonstrate that

geometry constraints are satisfied.
Use notes or labels to indicate material specification, part type, and assembly
directions.

6 IMPLEMENTASI DAN PENGUJIAN (IMPLEMENTATION AND
TESTING)

Manufacturing, or in this case is implementation using Lego bricks, begins once the
detailed design has been approved and ends when the machine is placed in the starting
zone of the final competition. In between, the machine will undergo numerous
modifications. Few new designs work on the first try. Manufacturing and testing will tend
to take much longer than expectedprobably from three to five times as long. This part
describe a summary of good manufacturing and testing strategies, and then moves on to
describe materials, joining methods, hand tools, etc.

6.1 IMPLEMENTASI (IMPLEMENTATION)

Uraikan hasil implementasi robotnya, tampilkan gambar-gambar beserta penjelasannya.

6.2 KRITERIA DAN METODA PENGUJIAN (TESTING CRITERIA AND
METHODS)

Jelaskan kriteria pengujian dan metodanya. Kriteria menjelaskan apa saja yang akan diuji,
metoda menjelaskan langkah-langkah detil mengujinya.

6.3 HASIL PENGUJ IAN (TESTING RESULTS)

Jabarkan proses pengujian dan hasil yang diperoleh

7 ANALISIS (ANALYSIS)

Pada bagian ini, berikan analisis terhadap hasil pengujian yang telah dilakukan.
Kemudian, lakukan juga eksplorasi dan analisis manfaat dan dampak solusi yang
ditawarkan pada project ini dalam konteks ekonomi, lingkungan dan sosial bila robot ini
diimplementasikan dan dimanfaatkan pada lingkungan nyata.


8 KESIMPULAN

Uraikan kesimpulan yang diperoleh dari hasil project ini.

9 Lampiran

<lampirkan hal-hal yang perlu dan belum termasuk dalam laporan di atas>

Laporan Transporter

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Laporan Transporter

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Nomor Dokumen: KU1201-01-2014.xx.

yy Nomor Revisi: 01 Tanggal: 9/25/2014 Halaman 1 dari 13

Anda mungkin juga menyukai