Tuesday, April 17, 2012
Selman's Reflection
The
overall lesson I learned from ME250 was that what you create in the ideal world
of SolidWorks could not be replicated into the real world without some error.
With that said, we assumed that the design and manufacturing process would take
up most of our time but in fact, the assembly process was the most time
consuming. Indeed, it took roughly 20 minutes to put the car together; however,
we would have to do this multiple times since we would encounter a new problem
each time and would need to accommodate for it. Unfortunately, fixing one
problem would open a Pandora’s box of other problems and given our severe time
constraints, we were extremely stressed out but our only option was to continue
to plow onwards. Nevertheless, back to the initial stages of the process, the
design process was by far the most critical to influencing the manufacturing
and assembling processes. For instance, we started to machine before SolidWorks
was finalized since we felt that we needed to start immediately. However,
looking back now, we definitely should have waited until we completed the
entire file since we could not easily apply changes to the design after having
parts already machined. Furthermore, once we were well into the manufacturing
process, I learned that patience is key the hard and painful way: having to
accommodate for the accumulating errors by revisiting already machined parts
and wasting valuable time. In addition, in the real world, parts are not the
exact dimensions they say they are, which led to wasting even more time by
having to ream, sand or mill parts we thought were finalized. Since there was a
lack of time, we realized quickly that organization and team management would
decide whether or not we would be able to complete the machine. Using our
CTools page, we made weekly (and as we got closer to the end, daily) lists of
things that needed to be done, which saved us substantial time and allowed us
to use our machine shop time more effectively. Once again, the reoccurring
theme of patience comes into play again because teams are diverse in nature and
need time to mesh, and ours was no exception. We definitely had different kinds
of members in the group (director, 2 analyzers and a supporter) and needed to
meet outside of class time to discuss the next step forward before going into
the shop. Once we were on the same page, the most stressful days towards the
end happened to be the most efficient. On a different note, the course was well
designed; however, what had us struggling the most was bridging the design
process to the manufacturing process. To be honest, I did not really understand
the lathe’s and mill’s full capabilities for nearly two weeks in the shop. One
way of fixing this would be to expose students to the shop earlier so that they
can understand what is the most reasonable way to design the car such that the
manufacturing process would be simplified. For instance, we maximized our
dimensions without realizing that it was a hassle to drill screw holes in the
sides of a 12” by 13” acrylic plate. Of course we happened to learn that the
hard way. In the end, it seems that learning something the hard way is a great
method of permanently remembering what not to do for the next project.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment