MMAN2100 – 2nd Year Design

School of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering

Requirements Scoping

Dr. Jason Held

+61 4 3317-8740
j.held@unsw.edu.au
Before we begin…

Logbooks?

Tutes okay?

1. New RFP – Team Create

:Landing Gear for a quad ‘copter
:Survive multiple drops 1.5m
:Mass < 200g
:Protect the payload

2. Bluesat solid works on Moodle

Why are we here?

Requirements Scoping
Requirements Document
Brainstorming
Feasibility
A fluid process

Brainstorming
Feasibility
Requirements Scoping
Requirements Document
Requirements
A requirement

Description of system properties

Specifications

States WHAT to do (not how)

Comes from Use Cases, constraints, RFP, interviews, market research

Requirement areas

COMPONENTS:

Functional

Usability

Technical

Environmental

Support

Interactions
Requirements – Categorise

Modular components

Type of requirement (System, Process, Out of scope)

System Components (for complex systems)

Subcategories

Organise it!
Prioritise

Review source and desired priority

Stakeholders involved

Estimate cost

Negotiate with stakeholders

Why?
Requirements Document
Requirements Document

Why?

Agreement by all

Set expectations

“Blueprint” for development

“Blueprint” for formal testing

ISO, MILSPEC
Requirements Document – Sections

1. Project Summary
- Context for development
- Overview of finished product
- Tools to use
- High level details of use case
- Other pertinent info

2. Requirements list
- User
- System
- Interface

3, 4, 5. Appendices, Glossary, Index

 Requirements Document – Recording

Recording
- Short title
- Detailed description
- Source (scenario, interview, RFP)
- Rationale
- Initial priority (from the customer)

Area Check Title Description

1.0 Material Non-shatter Containers must be a non-shatter material.

1.1 Polymer Preference Containers will, where possible, prefer polymers (which have some shielding properties) over metals.
1.2 Aluminium backup Containers will, where polymers are not possible, use aluminium.
1.3 Easy Cleaning Containers should be easy to clean.
1.4 500 CFU/100cm2 Containers surface will be compatible for cleaning to 500 CFU/100cm2 bacteria and 10 CFU/100cm2 fungi.

2.0 Shape Mitigate spillage Containers must be able to mitigate the risk of spillage as part of the design
2.1 Size < ~250ml Sample size must be reasonable (~250ml)
2.2 Irradiation package [TBD] Containers must be smaller than the NASA maximum size for irradiated food packaging [TBD].
Requirements Document – Classification

Classification
- Project component
- Type of requirement (system, process, out of scope)
- System components (for complex systems)
- Volitility – likeliness of change
- clarity
- Requirement, Assumption, or Issue
System – Primary

(Separate)
Process – User action
Out-of-Scope
Requirements Document – Strategy

How SPECIFIC should requirements be?

How much FLEXIBILITY?

What defines a DEFECT?

What defines a FEATURE?

For Example…
Requirements – Consider…

Constraints: NASA SP-2010-4307 and NASA-STD-3001

Packaging: 4-Pines Bottle CAD design

Logistics: 4-Pines Bottler constraints

Costs: Minimise costs for mass production

Use: Parabolic flight and XCOR

Quick look at NASA SP-2010-4307
6.3.2 Water Quality
Response – beer yeast not medically significant
Less alcohol than vodka, recipe okay for 0-g

6.3.2.2.1 Chemical Limits for crew health

Response – test H2O quality prior to brewing

6.3.4 Water Temperature for crew comfort

Response – Optimal temperature of Vostok “4-Pines” stout is 40C

6.3.2.2.2 and 6.4 Microbiological limits

Response – Irradiate and use non-shatter material

6.4.5 Biological Payloads

Response – beer yeast at BSL-1, “Allowed”

6.8.2.6.3 and 7.2.4 Induced Radioactivity

Response – use polymers, instead of metals for packaging
Quick look at NASA SP-2010-4307

7.2.2.1 General Considerations (Food)- as close to terrestrial as possible

Response – container sizing < (20.62cm x 12.06cm), < 200g / unit

7.2.3.1.7 Beverages- freeze dried or flavoured drinks the standard

Response – NEVER!!! 

7.8.2 Inventory Management

Response – Use NASA’s inventory standards

7.9 Waste
Response – Label as “non-hazard (wet)” waste

7.12.5 Housekeeping minimization through system design

Response – Container will be resealable
Container will act as its own waste vessel
Must be easy to clean, iac NASA SSP 50094
and again with NASA ST-3001…

Containers will conform to within the ISS chiller maximum size and volume limits

Containers will use a surface material which is compatible for cleaning to 500
CFU/100cm2 bacteria and 10 CFU/100cm2 fungi.

Containers will have an optional stubby holder.

[Review JSC 16888, Microbiology Operations Plan for Space Flight]

Containers will provide as close to a feel of terrestrial consumption as

possible, for enjoyment of the crew

Containers will have rounded edges iac table 14 and 15, section 9.3.1.4-9.3.1.7

Containers will be inspected / corrected to be free from burrs and sharp edges
4-Pines Bottling Line
Prefers deformable insert
Uses a sanitiser: http://msds.chem.ox.ac.uk/PE/peroxyacetic_acid.html
Must fit vent tube dimensions
Logistics requirements
Requirements often conflict!

NASA wants polymers

…Surface tension physics needs metals

Aluminium is best
…Not approved for medical use!

NASA AND 4-Pines wants a beer bottle to look like a beer bottle
…NASA wants all drinks to be powdered….
 NOT A CHANCE 

Area Check Title Description

1.0 Material Non-shatter Containers must be a non-shatter material.

1.1 Polymer Preference Containers will, where possible, prefer polymers (which have some shielding properties) over metals.
1.2 Aluminium backup Containers will, where polymers are not possible, use aluminium.
1.3 Easy Cleaning Containers should be easy to clean.
1.4 500 CFU/100cm2 Containers surface will be compatible for cleaning to 500 CFU/100cm2 bacteria and 10 CFU/100cm2 fungi.

2.0 Shape Mitigate spillage Containers must be able to mitigate the risk of spillage as part of the design
2.1 Size < ~250ml Sample size must be reasonable (~250ml)
2.2 Irradiation package [TBD] Containers must be smaller than the NASA maximum size for irradiated food packaging [TBD].
Brainstorming
 Brainstorming – Any Technique

Spontaneous Group problem solving

MANY ideas Everyone contributes

Experts and noobs Withhold criticism

Creative
Brainstorming

Technique 1 – Group discussion

Open conversation

Single facilitator

Blurt out ideas

Quick ideas, list then MOVE ON

Brainstorming

Technique 2 – Round robin

Start in a circle

Write idea down, then pass it on

Each person builds on the idea

Mind Map

Start with a defined topic

Each individual works separately

List by association

Subtopics, modular thinking

Then prioritise
Feasibility
Feasibility – The Big Picture

Organisational

Technical

Do I make it?

Market

Financial
Feasibility – The Big Picture
Management

Organisational
Resource

Technical Concept
Do I make it?
Usability
Market

Financial
Feasibility – Technical

Possible with available technology?

- Hardware available
- Software available

Technical risk?

Availability of the technology?

Reduce the design space

Feasibility – Example

Prioritise, Develop and clarify concepts from brainstorming

This is NOT a conceptual design, just development of options

Feasibility – Example

Mechanical challenge
Surface Tension – Quick primer

We want to maximize spreading of the liquid along surfaces of the beer bottle
towards the drinker’s mouth.

Spreading = A - (B+ C)

* A = surface energy of solid (given below)

* B = surface tension of liquid (given below)
* C = surface energy of solid-liquid interface (limited test data)

If Spreading < 0 liquid will bead up.

If Spreading >= 0 liquid will spread.
Surface Tension – Quick primer

We want to maximize spreading of the liquid along surfaces of the beer bottle
towards the drinker’s mouth.

𝛾𝑙𝑎 > 𝛾𝑙𝑠 − 𝛾𝑠𝑎 > 0

Since the forces are in direct proportion to their respective surface tensions,
we also have:
𝛾𝑙𝑠 − 𝛾𝑠𝑎 = −𝛾𝑙𝑎 cos 𝜃

H2O = 72mJ/m2
Alcohols = ~13mJ/m2
Beer….
Surface Tension – Quick primer

Surface tension of beer

… changes based on many properties
 Feasibility – Materials

Hydrocarbons Surface energy (dynes/cm)

Critical Surface
Polypropylene, OPP, BOPP .................................................. 29-31 Substrates (High Energy)
Polyethylene ........................................................................ 30-31 Tension, dynes/cm
Polyvinyl Acetate (PVA) Copolymer ................................... 33-44 Aluminum ~500
Polystyrene ............................................................................... 38 Copper 1360
Polystyrene (low ionomer) ....................................................... 33 Nickel 1770
ABS ...................................................................................... 35-42 Iron oxide 1357
Polyamide ............................................................................... <36
Beryllium oxide 1360
Epoxy ...................................................................................... <36
Lead 442
Polyester .............................................................................. 41-44
Rigid PVC .................................................................................. 39 Silver 890
Plasticized PVC .................................................................... 33-38 Glass ~1000
Engineering Thermoplastics
PET ...................................................................................... 41-44

WETTING…. Surface Energy of Solid ~10dynes/cm > Surface Tension of liquid

Feasibility – Mechanical
Feasibility – Use Case
Feasibility Analysis Matrix
Good
Choose evaluation criteria
Some Issues
Clarify and define criteria Concern

Design Wetting Safety Spillage Ease Manufacture Consumability

Petit Cup Not in Great! Must tilt head

parabolic,
some dexterity
for space
Bottle Integrated Retooling needed,
harder to test
Fan Insert Fan blades sharp Assembly required

Spider Insert 1 8 Assembly joints Extra step to use

Spider Insert 2 3 Assembly joints

Consider for your projects…

What are the constraints for the BlueSat project?

What are the constraints for the Microneedle project?

What about the SAE car projects?

An Imperial Walker