Anda di halaman 1dari 13







Nomor Dokumen KU1201- Clust01-2016.xx.yy <xx=kelas,

Nomor Revisi Versi <tuliskan no versi dokumen dari 00 dst>
Nama File <tuliskan nama file doc>
Tanggal Penerbitan <tanggal penyerahan dokumen>
Unit Penerbit PRD Cluster 1 - FMIPA STEI ITB
Jumlah Halaman <jumlah halaman> (termasuk lembar sampul ini)

Kelas: <xx> Kelompok: <xx> CLUSTER 1

Ditulis Nama/NIM: <nama> <NIM> <NIM>
oleh Nama/NIM: <nama> <NIM>
Nama/NIM: <nama> <NIM>
Nama/NIM: <nama> <NIM>
Nama/NIM: <nama> <NIM>
Nama/NIM: <nama> <NIM>

Tanda Tangan
Tanggal <tanggal/bulan/tahun>

Nomor Dokumen: KU1201-01-2014.xx.yy Nomor Revisi: 01 Tanggal: 10/14/2017 Halaman 1 dari 13

2017 Program Studi Teknik Elektro STEI ITB, Program TPB - PRD Cluster 1 FMIPA STEI.

Nomor Dokumen: KU1201-01-2014.xx.yy Nomor Revisi: 01 Tanggal: 10/14/2017 Halaman 2 dari 13

2017 Program Studi Teknik Elektro STEI ITB, Program TPB - PRD Cluster 1 FMIPA STEI.


Nomor Dokumen: KU1201-01-2014.xx.yy Nomor Revisi: 01 Tanggal: 10/14/2017 Halaman 3 dari 13

2017 Program Studi Teknik Elektro STEI ITB, Program TPB - PRD Cluster 1 FMIPA STEI.
<Tuliskan judul: Desain Robot apa>
1 Pengantar
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. Kosky, Philip. Exploring Engineering, An Introduction to Engineering and
Design, Elsevier Inc., 2010.
2. <isi dengan referensi lainnya>
3. <isi dengan referensi lainnya>
4. <isi dengan referensi lainnya>


PRD Pengantar Rekayasa dan Desain
LME Lego Mindstorms Education
<tuliskan daftar singkatan lainnya yang digunakan pada dokumen>


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>


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

Nomor Dokumen: KU1201-01-2014.xx.yy Nomor Revisi: 01 Tanggal: 10/14/2017 Halaman 4 dari 13

2017 Program Studi Teknik Elektro STEI ITB, Program TPB - PRD Cluster 1 FMIPA STEI.
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.


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

Nomor Dokumen: KU1201-01-2014.xx.yy Nomor Revisi: 01 Tanggal: 10/14/2017 Halaman 5 dari 13

2017 Program Studi Teknik Elektro STEI ITB, Program TPB - PRD Cluster 1 FMIPA STEI.
Specifications come in the following categories:


These categories can also be used as headings by which to organize the list of specifications.



Once the problem statement is in place, and the specifications have been listed, it is time to
generate alter- native 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.

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
Nomor Dokumen: KU1201-01-2014.xx.yy Nomor Revisi: 01 Tanggal: 10/14/2017 Halaman 6 dari 13
2017 Program Studi Teknik Elektro STEI ITB, Program TPB - PRD Cluster 1 FMIPA STEI.
three concepts should remain. If not, more brainstorming is in order.


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

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


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.

Nomor Dokumen: KU1201-01-2014.xx.yy Nomor Revisi: 01 Tanggal: 10/14/2017 Halaman 7 dari 13

2017 Program Studi Teknik Elektro STEI ITB, Program TPB - PRD Cluster 1 FMIPA STEI.
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



Suppose you now have generated three concepts that will meet the problem definition and
fulfill the specifi- cations. 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.


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.


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.

Nomor Dokumen: KU1201-01-2014.xx.yy Nomor Revisi: 01 Tanggal: 10/14/2017 Halaman 8 dari 13

2017 Program Studi Teknik Elektro STEI ITB, Program TPB - PRD Cluster 1 FMIPA STEI.

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 asso- ciated
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 proj- ects, five to seven of the most important evaluation criteria
should suffice. Easy to manufacture and low cost are almost always included in this list.


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

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

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

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
Nomor Dokumen: KU1201-01-2014.xx.yy Nomor Revisi: 01 Tanggal: 10/14/2017 Halaman 9 dari 13
2017 Program Studi Teknik Elektro STEI ITB, Program TPB - PRD Cluster 1 FMIPA STEI.
for final result. Rather, the chart should be regarded as a tool aimed at fostering an
exhaustive discussion of strengths and weaknesses.


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


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


Physical experiments are a particularly effective way to reduce risk when working with
small electromechan- ical 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.
Nomor Dokumen: KU1201-01-2014.xx.yy Nomor Revisi: 01 Tanggal: 10/14/2017 Halaman 10 dari 13
2017 Program Studi Teknik Elektro STEI ITB, Program TPB - PRD Cluster 1 FMIPA STEI.
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.


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.


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

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
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

Nomor Dokumen: KU1201-01-2014.xx.yy Nomor Revisi: 01 Tanggal: 10/14/2017 Halaman 11 dari 13

2017 Program Studi Teknik Elektro STEI ITB, Program TPB - PRD Cluster 1 FMIPA STEI.

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.


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



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


Jabarkan proses pengujian dan hasil yang diperoleh


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.


Uraikan kesimpulan yang diperoleh dari hasil project ini.

Nomor Dokumen: KU1201-01-2014.xx.yy Nomor Revisi: 01 Tanggal: 10/14/2017 Halaman 12 dari 13

2017 Program Studi Teknik Elektro STEI ITB, Program TPB - PRD Cluster 1 FMIPA STEI.
9 Lampiran

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

Nomor Dokumen: KU1201-01-2014.xx.yy Nomor Revisi: 01 Tanggal: 10/14/2017 Halaman 13 dari 13

2017 Program Studi Teknik Elektro STEI ITB, Program TPB - PRD Cluster 1 FMIPA STEI.