design project final presentation
DESCRIPTION
Final presentation for a mechanical engineering design project which considers the creation of a product to evenly distribute passengers along subway / train platforms. Useful for undergraduate engineering design students. Own work.TRANSCRIPT
-
Sissi Wang, Jennifer Wong, Song Yang
-
Problem Lead users User needs Existing solutions Concept generation Concept evaluation Final design Limitations
-
Passengers congregate near entrances/exits on subway platforms during high trac
Areas of high density cause increased train boarding times
-
Lead users: Law enforcement Military Daily TTC commuters
Law enforcement and military extreme cases of crowd control
Daily TTC commuters encounters crowding more often than general population
-
A focus group was used to identify the needs of frequent TTC commuters
3 major user needs identied: Eectiveness
Time for all passengers to board the train Comfort
Minimum distance between user and others Amount of sensory discomfort
Accessibility Amount of clearance available
-
Physical barriers Eective control, poor accessibility
Signage and announcements Not eective since passive
Law enforcement equipment (high-frequency audio, concentrated heat) Eective control, but harmful
-
Change the texture of the oor near entrances/exits, making it less desirable to stand on
-
Base case: LCD signs (animation and text)
Substitute Substitute vision with other senses, then...
Magnify Increase intensity: Visual Strobe lights Aural Directed impulse signals Temperature Directed heat lamps at entrances/exits
-
15) Principle of Dynamism:
See-saw platform: takes advantage of peoples preference for at, balanced surfaces
-
1. open: Sodium channels open when the Na + concentration is much higher outside than inside
One-way turnstiles
-
2. "spread": Microscopic channels which traverse cell walls, enabling transport. Discretized platform
-
Criteria A B C D E F Row Total Weights
A) Accessibility - 0 1 0 1 0 2 0.13
B) Eectiveness 1 - 1 0 1 1 4 0.27
C) Comfort 0 0 - 0 1 1 2 0.13
D) Cost 1 1 0 - 1 1 4 0.27
E) Durability 0 1 0 0 - 1 2 0.13
F) Adaptability 1 0 0 0 0 - 1 0.07
TOTAL 15 1
-
Textured Floor
Aggressive solutions
See-saw platform Turnstiles
Discretized platform
Criteria Rating
A) Accessibility 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.13 0.26
B) Eectiveness
0.27 0.81 0.54 0.81 0.54
C) Comfort 0.26 0.13 0.13 0.26 0.39
D) Cost 0.81 0.27 0.27 0.54 0.81
E) Durability 0.39 0.39 0.26 0.39 0.26
F) Adaptability 0.21 0.14 0.14 0.21 0.21
TOTAL 2.2 2 1.6 2.34 2.47
-
Criteria Std Textured oor
Aggressive solutions
See-saw platform
Turnstiles Discretized platform
Accessibility - 0 - 0 0
Eectiveness + + + + +
Comfort - - - 0 0
Cost 0 - - - -
Durability 0 0 0 + 0
Adaptability 0 0 0 0 0
Sum (+) 1 1 1 2 1
Sum (-) 2 2 3 1 1
Sum (0) 3 3 2 3 4
TOTAL -1 -1 -2 +1 0
Standard: TTC signage/PA broadcasts
-
Concepts Weighted Decision Matrix Pugh Chart
Textured oor 2.2 -1
Aggressive solutions 2 -1
See-saw platform 1.6 -2
Turnstiles 2.34 +1
Discretized platform 2.47 0
Discretized platform and turnstiles Ranked high in eectiveness and cost
Aggressive solutions and see-saw platform Ranked low in cost and comfort
-
Objectives: Adjustable length Easy to move around
-
Along platform edge: secure with vice Along platform surface: secure with suction (vacuum) lock
Secure panels with torx security screws
-
Cross-sectional view Side view
1 m 1 m
3 m 0.06 m
Material: Aluminum Total mass: 113.4 kg Material cost: $219.54
-
Advantages over existing solutions:
Provides more accessibility than current physical barriers
Less intrusive and harmful than law enforcement equipment
-
Product potential:
Applications beyond TTC platforms due to Adjustable length Ability to be secured onto any protruding edge
Low material cost
Easy to implement
-
Limitations: Users can fail to follow instructions Cannot see where empty sections are
Possible improvements: Use with LCD screens Include grooves/rollers at the base of each panel to reduce friction during extension
-
Pugh Chart Pairwise comparisons to determine objective weights may fail due to inconsistent logic
Assumption that every objective is equally important
Weighted decision matrix Scoring system was a 3-point scale, could have ner granularity given more information
-
Textured Floor Aggressive solutions
Criteria Weight Factor Score Rating Score Rating
A) Accessibility 0.13 2 0.26 2 0.26
B) Eectiveness 0.27 1 0.27 3 0.81
C) Comfort 0.13 2 0.26 1 0.13
D) Cost 0.27 3 0.81 1 0.27
E) Durability 0.13 3 0.39 3 0.39
F) Adaptability 0.07 3 0.21 2 0.14
TOTAL 1 2.2 2
1 = Poor, 2 = Fair, 3 = Good
-
See-saw platform Turnstiles
Criteria Weight Factor Score Rating Score Rating
A) Accessibility 0.13 2 0.26 1 0.13
B) Eectiveness 0.27 2 0.54 3 0.81
C) Comfort 0.13 1 0.13 2 0.26
D) Cost 0.27 1 0.27 2 0.54
E) Durability 0.13 2 0.26 3 0.39
F) Adaptability 0.07 2 0.14 3 0.21
TOTAL 1 1.6 2.34
1 = Poor, 2 = Fair, 3 = Good
-
Discretized platform
Criteria Weight Factor Score Rating
A) Accessibility 0.13 2 0.26
B) Eectiveness 0.27 2 0.54
C) Comfort 0.13 3 0.39
D) Cost 0.27 3 0.81
E) Durability 0.13 2 0.26
F) Adaptability 0.07 3 0.21
TOTAL 1 2.47
1 = Poor, 2 = Fair, 3 = Good