P14417: B9 Plastics - Particle FilterDetailed Design Review

Dan Anderson / Thomas Heberle / Perry Hosmer / Karina Roundtree / Kelly Stover

December 10, 2013

Agenda

• Problem Definition (time?)

• Updated Design and Bill of Materials Justification (time?)

• Test Plans (time?)

• Assembly Procedure (time?)

• Project Management (time?)

Problem Definition

Problem Statement

Current State:

• In order to use the Better Water Maker (BWM) users must first pour the water through

a cloth before being treated.

Desired State:

• The device should clear particles from water to allow the BWM to operate more

effectively.

• The device should be simple to use and operable by both women and children.

Project Goals:

• Analyze the design selected by P13418

• Improve the effectiveness of the Better Water Maker

Notable Constraints:

• Must be usable by both women and children

• Only locally available materials may be consumed

• Must not negatively impact the smell and taste of water

Project Scope & Deliverables

• Project Scopeo Eliminate particles greater than 5 microns in size

o Produce a design that is economically viable for use in developing countries

o Design the device to be reusable, and use only consumable parts that are

locally available

• Deliverables to dateo Functional prototype

o Bill of Materials

o Design Drawings

o Assembly and manufacturing plan

o Test plan and results

Customer RequirementsCustomer

Requirement

Category Description Importance

CR1 Ease of Use Easy to prepare for use 9

CR2 Ease of Use Lightweight for user transport / shipping 3

CR3 Ease of Use Has a minimal startup period 3

CR4 Ease of Use Operates using only naturally available energy 9

CR5 Economics Inexpensive 9

CR6 EconomicsUsable by a family of 5, for 2-5 years without full replacement

9

CR7 EconomicsRequires no consumables for operation (other than cheap and locally available materials)

9

CR8Functionality

Improves UV transmission 9

CR9Functionality

Decreases turbidity 9

CR10Functionality

Decreases total suspended solids 9

CR11Functionality

Does not negatively affect taste 3

CR12 Safety Does not negatively affect safety of water 9

CR13Functionality

Filters enough water for a family of 5, daily 3

Engineering RequirementsCategor

yScore Customer Requirement Function Metric Units Margina

lTarget

Ease of Use 3 Easy to clean / rechargeEasy to prepare for use Time to clean minutes 10 5

Ease of Use 3 Easy to clean / recharge Easy to prepare for use

Number of tools required for cleaning by the end user

- 2 1

Ease of Use 3 Lightweight for transportMinimize weight of filter Weight in lbs lbs 10 5

Ease of Use 3 Has a minimal start-up period. Minimize start-up

Time elapsed between beginning of pour and first water that enters the bucket

seconds 30 10

Ease of Use 3Operates using only energy available naturally (gravity, human power, etc.)

Doesn't need power source

Binary (Yes/No) - - No

Economics 3 Filter is inexpensive Minimize cost of filter Total cost to produce US $ 25 20

Economics 3Usable by a family of 5, for 2-5 years w/out full replacement

Maximize durability of filter Mean Time To Failure

# of uses 730 3650

Economics 9

Requires no consumables for operation, except for very cheap & locally available materials (salt, soap, sand, etc.)

Minimize cost to maintain Annual cost to operate US $ 2 0

Functionality 9 Decreases turbidity

Turbidity is decreased Percentage Decrease % >50% >75%

Functionality

9 Decreases total suspended solids

Total suspended solids decreased

Percentage Decrease % >50% >75%

Functionality

3 Does not negatively affect the taste of the water

No negative taste of water

Percent of people who say water tastes the same or better

% >50% >75%

Safety 3 No hazardous releasesDoesn't produce hazardous release, no chemicals added

Binary (Yes/No) - - No

Functionality 3 Use Scenarios

Provides enough water for family of 5, daily Flowrate lpm 0.0394 0.6309

Updated Design and Bill of Materials

Updated Drawing – CAD Drawing

Updated Drawing – Exploded BOM

1

2

4

3

No. Item Vendor

1 Bottomless bucket The Cary Company2 Lid The Cary Company

3 5 Micron Mesh Macro Specialty Steel

4 Bucket The Cary Company

Bottomless Bucket

Bottomless Bucket

• Bucket in BOM chosen was inexpensive

• Most buckets would work

No. Item Vendor Vendor item number/description

Qty Price per item

price per unit

tools to make

1 Bottomless bucket The Cary Company 57WCU5 1.00 2.97 2.97 saw to cut out hole

Lid

Lid

• Matches bucket bottom, reusable

• Inexpensive

No. Item Vendor Vendor item number/description

Qty Price per item

price per unit

tools to make

2 Lid The Cary Company 57WCUP 1.00 1.47 1.47 drill for holes

5 Micron Mesh

5 Micron Mesh

• Stainless steel- limits corrosion

• Material often used in filters

No. Item VendorVendor item

number/descriptionQty

Price per item/Sq

ft

price per unit

tools to make

3 5 Micron Mesh Macro Specialty Steel200x1400 Twill Dutch

Weave 316ss1.00 11.75 6.32 cut to size

Bucket

Bucket

• Inexpensive

• 5 gallon deemed a good size

• Same as bottomless bucket

No. Item Vendor Vendor item number/description

Qty Price per item

price per unit

tools to make

4 Bucket The Cary Company 57WCU5 1.00 2.97 2.97 N/A

Spacer

Rod

Spacer and Rods

• Used to seal in mesh in assembly and to provide space

between mesh and lid

No. Item VendorVendor item

number/descriptionQty

Price per item/Sq

ft

price per unit

tools to make

6 Spacers N/AMade from cut out

portion of bottomless 44.00 0.00 0.00 Some type of shear to cut

7 Rods N/AMade from cut out

portion of bottomless bucket

20.00 0.00 0.00 Some type of shear to cut

Indented BOMNo. Item Vendor

Vendor item number/description

QtyPrice per item/Sq

ft

price per unit

tools to make

1 Bottomless bucket The Cary Company 57WCU5 1.00 2.97 2.97 saw to cut out hole2 Lid The Cary Company 57WCUP 1.00 1.47 1.47 drill for holes

3 5 Micron Mesh Macro Specialty Steel200x1400 Twill Dutch

Weave 316ss1.00 11.75 6.32 cut to size

4 Bucket The Cary Company 57WCU5 1.00 2.97 2.97 N/A

5 Nylon Brush Home DepotQuickie Original Iron

Handle Curved Plastic Scrub Brush

1.00 2.19 2.19 N/A

6 Spacers N/AMade from cut out

portion of bottomless 44.00 0.00 0.00 Some type of shear to cut

7 Rods N/AMade from cut out

portion of bottomless bucket

20.00 0.00 0.00 Some type of shear to cut

total 15.92

Assembly Procedure

Steps…

Engineering Requirements

Engineering RequirementsCategor

yScore Customer Requirement Function Metric Units Margina

lTarget

Ease of Use 3 Easy to clean / rechargeEasy to prepare for use Time to clean minutes 10 5

Ease of Use 3 Easy to clean / recharge Easy to prepare for use

Number of tools required for cleaning by the end user

- 2 1

Ease of Use 3 Lightweight for transportMinimize weight of filter Weight in lbs lbs 10 5

Ease of Use 3 Has a minimal start-up period. Minimize start-up

Time elapsed between beginning of pour and first water that enters the bucket

seconds 30 10

Ease of Use 3Operates using only energy available naturally (gravity, human power, etc.)

Doesn't need power source

Binary (Yes/No) - - No

Economics 3 Filter is inexpensive Minimize cost of filter Total cost to produce US $ 25 20

Economics 3Usable by a family of 5, for 2-5 years w/out full replacement

Maximize durability of filter Mean Time To Failure

# of uses 730 3650

Economics 9

Requires no consumables for operation, except for very cheap & locally available materials (salt, soap, sand, etc.)

Minimize cost to maintain Annual cost to operate US $ 2 0

Functionality 9 Decreases turbidity

Turbidity is decreased Percentage Decrease % >50% >75%

Functionality

9 Decreases total suspended solids

Total suspended solids decreased

Percentage Decrease % >50% >75%

Functionality

3 Does not negatively affect the taste of the water

No negative taste of water

Percent of people who say water tastes the same or better

% >50% >75%

Safety 3 No hazardous releasesDoesn't produce hazardous release, no chemicals added

Binary (Yes/No) - - No

Functionality 3 Use Scenarios

Provides enough water for family of 5, daily Flowrate lpm 0.0394 0.6309

Time to Clean

• Pilot study: select 30 participants, provide cleaning instructions,

time the process

• Hypothesis test (95% confidence) on the average time to clean

product

o H0: µ >= 5 minutes

o HA: µ < 5 minutes

• Adjustments in sample size (i.e. additional observations) may be

necessary depending on the variance in the observed results

• If the cleaning time is over the target value of 5 minutes, test for

marginal success of 10 minutes

Category

Score Customer Requirement Function Metric Units Marginal

Target

Ease of Use 3 Easy to clean / rechargeEasy to prepare for use Time to clean minutes 10 5

Ease of Use 3 Easy to clean / recharge Easy to prepare for use

Number of tools required for cleaning by the end user

- 2 1

Ease of Use 3 Lightweight for transportMinimize weight of filter Weight in lbs lbs 10 5

Ease of Use 3 Has a minimal start-up period. Minimize start-up

Time elapsed between beginning of pour and first water that enters the bucket

seconds 30 10

Ease of Use 3Operates using only energy available naturally (gravity, human power, etc.)

Doesn't need power source

Binary (Yes/No) - - No

Economics 3 Filter is inexpensive Minimize cost of filter Total cost to produce US $ 25 20

Economics 3Usable by a family of 5, for 2-5 years w/out full replacement

Maximize durability of filter Mean Time To Failure

# of uses 730 3650

Economics 9

Requires no consumables for operation, except for very cheap & locally available materials (salt, soap, sand, etc.)

Minimize cost to maintain Annual cost to operate US $ 2 0

Functionality 9 Decreases turbidity

Turbidity is decreased Percentage Decrease % >50% >75%

Functionality

9 Decreases total suspended solids

Total suspended solids decreased

Percentage Decrease % >50% >75%

Functionality

3 Does not negatively affect the taste of the water

No negative taste of water

Percent of people who say water tastes the same or better

% >50% >75%

Safety 3 No hazardous releasesDoesn't produce hazardous release, no chemicals added

Binary (Yes/No) - - No

Functionality 3 Use Scenarios

Provides enough water for family of 5, daily Flowrate lpm 0.0394 0.6309

Engineering Requirements

Number of Tools Required for Cleaning

• Count of tools required

• Nylon cloth is best material to clean this stainless steel

mesh

• Image of brush (KARINA WILL DECIDE THIS)

Engineering RequirementsCategor

yScore Customer Requirement Function Metric Units Margina

lTarget

Ease of Use 3 Easy to clean / rechargeEasy to prepare for use Time to clean minutes 10 5

Ease of Use 3 Easy to clean / recharge Easy to prepare for use

Number of tools required for cleaning by the end user

- 2 1

Ease of Use 3 Lightweight for transportMinimize weight of filter Weight in lbs lbs 10 5

Ease of Use 3 Has a minimal start-up period. Minimize start-up

Time elapsed between beginning of pour and first water that enters the bucket

seconds 30 10

Ease of Use 3Operates using only energy available naturally (gravity, human power, etc.)

Doesn't need power source

Binary (Yes/No) - - No

Economics 3 Filter is inexpensive Minimize cost of filter Total cost to produce US $ 25 20

Economics 3Usable by a family of 5, for 2-5 years w/out full replacement

Maximize durability of filter Mean Time To Failure

# of uses 730 3650

Economics 9

Requires no consumables for operation, except for very cheap & locally available materials (salt, soap, sand, etc.)

Minimize cost to maintain Annual cost to operate US $ 2 0

Functionality 9 Decreases turbidity

Turbidity is decreased Percentage Decrease % >50% >75%

Functionality

9 Decreases total suspended solids

Total suspended solids decreased

Percentage Decrease % >50% >75%

Functionality

3 Does not negatively affect the taste of the water

No negative taste of water

Percent of people who say water tastes the same or better

% >50% >75%

Safety 3 No hazardous releasesDoesn't produce hazardous release, no chemicals added

Binary (Yes/No) - - No

Functionality 3 Use Scenarios

Provides enough water for family of 5, daily Flowrate lpm 0.0394 0.6309

Weight

Component Quantity Weight/assembly (lbs)

Bucket 2 3.60

Lid 1 .38

5 micron mesh 0.54 .35

Total 4.33

Engineering RequirementsCategor

yScore Customer Requirement Function Metric Units Margina

lTarget

Ease of Use 3 Easy to clean / rechargeEasy to prepare for use Time to clean minutes 10 5

Ease of Use 3 Easy to clean / recharge Easy to prepare for use

Number of tools required for cleaning by the end user

- 2 1

Ease of Use 3 Lightweight for transportMinimize weight of filter Weight in lbs lbs 10 5

Ease of Use 3 Has a minimal start-up period. Minimize start-up

Time elapsed between beginning of pour and first water that enters the bucket

seconds 30 10

Ease of Use 3Operates using only energy available naturally (gravity, human power, etc.)

Doesn't need power source

Binary (Yes/No) - - No

Economics 3 Filter is inexpensive Minimize cost of filter Total cost to produce US $ 25 20

Economics 3Usable by a family of 5, for 2-5 years w/out full replacement

Maximize durability of filter Mean Time To Failure

# of uses 730 3650

Economics 9

Requires no consumables for operation, except for very cheap & locally available materials (salt, soap, sand, etc.)

Minimize cost to maintain Annual cost to operate US $ 2 0

Functionality 9 Decreases turbidity

Turbidity is decreased Percentage Decrease % >50% >75%

Functionality

9 Decreases total suspended solids

Total suspended solids decreased

Percentage Decrease % >50% >75%

Functionality

3 Does not negatively affect the taste of the water

No negative taste of water

Percent of people who say water tastes the same or better

% >50% >75%

Safety 3 No hazardous releasesDoesn't produce hazardous release, no chemicals added

Binary (Yes/No) - - No

Functionality 3 Use Scenarios

Provides enough water for family of 5, daily Flowrate lpm 0.0394 0.6309

Start-up Time

• Pilot study: collect 30 observations of start up time

• Hypothesis test (95% confidence) on the average start up

time

o H0: µ >= 10 seconds

o HA: µ < 10 seconds

• Adjustments in sample size (i.e. additional observations)

may be necessary depending on the variance in the

observed results

• If the cleaning time is over the target value of 10 seconds,

test for marginal success of 30 seconds

Engineering RequirementsCategor

yScore Customer Requirement Function Metric Units Margina

lTarget

Ease of Use 3 Easy to clean / rechargeEasy to prepare for use Time to clean minutes 10 5

Ease of Use 3 Easy to clean / recharge Easy to prepare for use

Number of tools required for cleaning by the end user

- 2 1

Ease of Use 3 Lightweight for transportMinimize weight of filter Weight in lbs lbs 10 5

Ease of Use 3 Has a minimal start-up period. Minimize start-up

Time elapsed between beginning of pour and first water that enters the bucket

seconds 30 10

Ease of Use 3Operates using only energy available naturally (gravity, human power, etc.)

Doesn't need power source

Binary (Yes/No) - - No

Economics 3 Filter is inexpensive Minimize cost of filter Total cost to produce US $ 25 20

Economics 3Usable by a family of 5, for 2-5 years w/out full replacement

Maximize durability of filter Mean Time To Failure

# of uses 730 3650

Economics 9

Requires no consumables for operation, except for very cheap & locally available materials (salt, soap, sand, etc.)

Minimize cost to maintain Annual cost to operate US $ 2 0

Functionality 9 Decreases turbidity

Turbidity is decreased Percentage Decrease % >50% >75%

Functionality

9 Decreases total suspended solids

Total suspended solids decreased

Percentage Decrease % >50% >75%

Functionality

3 Does not negatively affect the taste of the water

No negative taste of water

Percent of people who say water tastes the same or better

% >50% >75%

Safety 3 No hazardous releasesDoesn't produce hazardous release, no chemicals added

Binary (Yes/No) - - No

Functionality 3 Use Scenarios

Provides enough water for family of 5, daily Flowrate lpm 0.0394 0.6309

No Power Source Needed

• Show a picture of the design on this page

• “Based on our design, there is no power source necessary”

Engineering RequirementsCategor

yScore Customer Requirement Function Metric Units Margina

lTarget

Ease of Use 3 Easy to clean / rechargeEasy to prepare for use Time to clean minutes 10 5

Ease of Use 3 Easy to clean / recharge Easy to prepare for use

Number of tools required for cleaning by the end user

- 2 1

Ease of Use 3 Lightweight for transportMinimize weight of filter Weight in lbs lbs 10 5

Ease of Use 3 Has a minimal start-up period. Minimize start-up

Time elapsed between beginning of pour and first water that enters the bucket

seconds 30 10

Ease of Use 3Operates using only energy available naturally (gravity, human power, etc.)

Doesn't need power source

Binary (Yes/No) - - No

Economics 3 Filter is inexpensive Minimize cost of filter Total cost to produce US $ 25 20

Economics 3Usable by a family of 5, for 2-5 years w/out full replacement

Maximize durability of filter Mean Time To Failure

# of uses 730 3650

Economics 9

Requires no consumables for operation, except for very cheap & locally available materials (salt, soap, sand, etc.)

Minimize cost to maintain Annual cost to operate US $ 2 0

Functionality 9 Decreases turbidity

Turbidity is decreased Percentage Decrease % >50% >75%

Functionality

9 Decreases total suspended solids

Total suspended solids decreased

Percentage Decrease % >50% >75%

Functionality

3 Does not negatively affect the taste of the water

No negative taste of water

Percent of people who say water tastes the same or better

% >50% >75%

Safety 3 No hazardous releasesDoesn't produce hazardous release, no chemicals added

Binary (Yes/No) - - No

Functionality 3 Use Scenarios

Provides enough water for family of 5, daily Flowrate lpm 0.0394 0.6309

Total Cost of Components

Component Quantity Cost/assembly

Bucket 2 $5.94

Lid 1 $1.47

5 micron mesh 0.54 $6.32

Brush

Total

Labor Cost Estimations

• Based on the assembly plans

Engineering RequirementsCategor

yScore Customer Requirement Function Metric Units Margina

lTarget

Ease of Use 3 Easy to clean / rechargeEasy to prepare for use Time to clean minutes 10 5

Ease of Use 3 Easy to clean / recharge Easy to prepare for use

Number of tools required for cleaning by the end user

- 2 1

Ease of Use 3 Lightweight for transportMinimize weight of filter Weight in lbs lbs 10 5

Ease of Use 3 Has a minimal start-up period. Minimize start-up

Time elapsed between beginning of pour and first water that enters the bucket

seconds 30 10

Ease of Use 3Operates using only energy available naturally (gravity, human power, etc.)

Doesn't need power source

Binary (Yes/No) - - No

Economics 3 Filter is inexpensive Minimize cost of filter Total cost to produce US $ 25 20

Economics 3Usable by a family of 5, for 2-5 years w/out full replacement

Maximize durability of filter Mean Time To Failure

# of uses 730 3650

Economics 9

Requires no consumables for operation, except for very cheap & locally available materials (salt, soap, sand, etc.)

Minimize cost to maintain Annual cost to operate US $ 2 0

Functionality 9 Decreases turbidity

Turbidity is decreased Percentage Decrease % >50% >75%

Functionality

9 Decreases total suspended solids

Total suspended solids decreased

Percentage Decrease % >50% >75%

Functionality

3 Does not negatively affect the taste of the water

No negative taste of water

Percent of people who say water tastes the same or better

% >50% >75%

Safety 3 No hazardous releasesDoesn't produce hazardous release, no chemicals added

Binary (Yes/No) - - No

Functionality 3 Use Scenarios

Provides enough water for family of 5, daily Flowrate lpm 0.0394 0.6309

Mean Time to Failure

Engineering RequirementsCategor

yScore Customer Requirement Function Metric Units Margina

lTarget

Ease of Use 3 Easy to clean / rechargeEasy to prepare for use Time to clean minutes 10 5

Ease of Use 3 Easy to clean / recharge Easy to prepare for use

Number of tools required for cleaning by the end user

- 2 1

Ease of Use 3 Lightweight for transportMinimize weight of filter Weight in lbs lbs 10 5

Ease of Use 3 Has a minimal start-up period. Minimize start-up

Time elapsed between beginning of pour and first water that enters the bucket

seconds 30 10

Ease of Use 3Operates using only energy available naturally (gravity, human power, etc.)

Doesn't need power source

Binary (Yes/No) - - No

Economics 3 Filter is inexpensive Minimize cost of filter Total cost to produce US $ 25 20

Economics 3Usable by a family of 5, for 2-5 years w/out full replacement

Maximize durability of filter Mean Time To Failure

# of uses 730 3650

Economics 9

Requires no consumables for operation, except for very cheap & locally available materials (salt, soap, sand, etc.)

Minimize cost to maintain Annual cost to operate US $ 2 0

Functionality 9 Decreases turbidity

Turbidity is decreased Percentage Decrease % >50% >75%

Functionality

9 Decreases total suspended solids

Total suspended solids decreased

Percentage Decrease % >50% >75%

Functionality

3 Does not negatively affect the taste of the water

No negative taste of water

Percent of people who say water tastes the same or better

% >50% >75%

Safety 3 No hazardous releasesDoesn't produce hazardous release, no chemicals added

Binary (Yes/No) - - No

Functionality 3 Use Scenarios

Provides enough water for family of 5, daily Flowrate lpm 0.0394 0.6309

Operating Costs

• All components will last longer than the required 2 years.

• Operating costs will be $0/year

Engineering RequirementsCategor

yScore Customer Requirement Function Metric Units Margina

lTarget

Ease of Use 3 Easy to clean / rechargeEasy to prepare for use Time to clean minutes 10 5

Ease of Use 3 Easy to clean / recharge Easy to prepare for use

Number of tools required for cleaning by the end user

- 2 1

Ease of Use 3 Lightweight for transportMinimize weight of filter Weight in lbs lbs 10 5

Ease of Use 3 Has a minimal start-up period. Minimize start-up

Time elapsed between beginning of pour and first water that enters the bucket

seconds 30 10

Ease of Use 3Operates using only energy available naturally (gravity, human power, etc.)

Doesn't need power source

Binary (Yes/No) - - No

Economics 3 Filter is inexpensive Minimize cost of filter Total cost to produce US $ 25 20

Economics 3Usable by a family of 5, for 2-5 years w/out full replacement

Maximize durability of filter Mean Time To Failure

# of uses 730 3650

Economics 9

Requires no consumables for operation, except for very cheap & locally available materials (salt, soap, sand, etc.)

Minimize cost to maintain Annual cost to operate US $ 2 0

Functionality 9 Decreases turbidity

Turbidity is decreased Percentage Decrease % >50% >75%

Functionality

9 Decreases total suspended solids

Total suspended solids decreased

Percentage Decrease % >50% >75%

Functionality

3 Does not negatively affect the taste of the water

No negative taste of water

Percent of people who say water tastes the same or better

% >50% >75%

Safety 3 No hazardous releasesDoesn't produce hazardous release, no chemicals added

Binary (Yes/No) - - No

Functionality 3 Use Scenarios

Provides enough water for family of 5, daily Flowrate lpm 0.0394 0.6309

Percentage Decrease in Turbidity

• Pilot study: collect 30 observations of turbidityo Collect before/after, compute % difference

• Hypothesis test (95% confidence) on the average % difference

o H0: µ >= .75

o HA: µ > .75

• Adjustments in sample size (i.e. additional observations) may be

necessary depending on the variance in the observed results

• If turbidity does not meet target, test at 50% for marginal

success

Engineering RequirementsCategor

yScore Customer Requirement Function Metric Units Margina

lTarget

Ease of Use 3 Easy to clean / rechargeEasy to prepare for use Time to clean minutes 10 5

Ease of Use 3 Easy to clean / recharge Easy to prepare for use

Number of tools required for cleaning by the end user

- 2 1

Ease of Use 3 Lightweight for transportMinimize weight of filter Weight in lbs lbs 10 5

Ease of Use 3 Has a minimal start-up period. Minimize start-up

Time elapsed between beginning of pour and first water that enters the bucket

seconds 30 10

Ease of Use 3Operates using only energy available naturally (gravity, human power, etc.)

Doesn't need power source

Binary (Yes/No) - - No

Economics 3 Filter is inexpensive Minimize cost of filter Total cost to produce US $ 25 20

Economics 3Usable by a family of 5, for 2-5 years w/out full replacement

Maximize durability of filter Mean Time To Failure

# of uses 730 3650

Economics 9

Requires no consumables for operation, except for very cheap & locally available materials (salt, soap, sand, etc.)

Minimize cost to maintain Annual cost to operate US $ 2 0

Functionality 9 Decreases turbidity

Turbidity is decreased Percentage Decrease % >50% >75%

Functionality

9 Decreases total suspended solids

Total suspended solids decreased

Percentage Decrease % >50% >75%

Functionality

3 Does not negatively affect the taste of the water

No negative taste of water

Percent of people who say water tastes the same or better

% >50% >75%

Safety 3 No hazardous releasesDoesn't produce hazardous release, no chemicals added

Binary (Yes/No) - - No

Functionality 3 Use Scenarios

Provides enough water for family of 5, daily Flowrate lpm 0.0394 0.6309

Percentage Decrease in Total Suspended Solids• Pilot study: collect 30 observations of TSS

o Collect before/after, compute % difference

• Hypothesis test (95% confidence) on the average % difference

o H0: µ >= .75

o HA: µ > .75

• Adjustments in sample size (i.e. additional observations) may be

necessary depending on the variance in the observed results

• If turbidity does not meet target, test at 50% for marginal

success

Engineering RequirementsCategor

yScore Customer Requirement Function Metric Units Margina

lTarget

Ease of Use 3 Easy to clean / rechargeEasy to prepare for use Time to clean minutes 10 5

Ease of Use 3 Easy to clean / recharge Easy to prepare for use

Number of tools required for cleaning by the end user

- 2 1

Ease of Use 3 Lightweight for transportMinimize weight of filter Weight in lbs lbs 10 5

Ease of Use 3 Has a minimal start-up period. Minimize start-up

Time elapsed between beginning of pour and first water that enters the bucket

seconds 30 10

Ease of Use 3Operates using only energy available naturally (gravity, human power, etc.)

Doesn't need power source

Binary (Yes/No) - - No

Economics 3 Filter is inexpensive Minimize cost of filter Total cost to produce US $ 25 20

Economics 3Usable by a family of 5, for 2-5 years w/out full replacement

Maximize durability of filter Mean Time To Failure

# of uses 730 3650

Economics 9

Requires no consumables for operation, except for very cheap & locally available materials (salt, soap, sand, etc.)

Minimize cost to maintain Annual cost to operate US $ 2 0

Functionality 9 Decreases turbidity

Turbidity is decreased Percentage Decrease % >50% >75%

Functionality

9 Decreases total suspended solids

Total suspended solids decreased

Percentage Decrease % >50% >75%

Functionality

3 Does not negatively affect the taste of the water

No negative taste of water

Percent of people who say water tastes the same or better

% >50% >75%

Safety 3 No hazardous releasesDoesn't produce hazardous release, no chemicals added

Binary (Yes/No) - - No

Functionality 3 Use Scenarios

Provides enough water for family of 5, daily Flowrate lpm 0.0394 0.6309

Taste of Water

• Recruit at least 100 RIT students

• Have each drink tap water that has not been treated with

the filter and water that has been treated by the filter

(blind)

• Ask each student if the water tastes better, worse, or about

the same

• Target: 75% respond with better or about the same

• Marginal: 50% respond with better or about the same

Engineering RequirementsCategor

yScore Customer Requirement Function Metric Units Margina

lTarget

Ease of Use 3 Easy to clean / rechargeEasy to prepare for use Time to clean minutes 10 5

Ease of Use 3 Easy to clean / recharge Easy to prepare for use

Number of tools required for cleaning by the end user

- 2 1

Ease of Use 3 Lightweight for transportMinimize weight of filter Weight in lbs lbs 10 5

Ease of Use 3 Has a minimal start-up period. Minimize start-up

Time elapsed between beginning of pour and first water that enters the bucket

seconds 30 10

Ease of Use 3Operates using only energy available naturally (gravity, human power, etc.)

Doesn't need power source

Binary (Yes/No) - - No

Economics 3 Filter is inexpensive Minimize cost of filter Total cost to produce US $ 25 20

Economics 3Usable by a family of 5, for 2-5 years w/out full replacement

Maximize durability of filter Mean Time To Failure

# of uses 730 3650

Economics 9

Requires no consumables for operation, except for very cheap & locally available materials (salt, soap, sand, etc.)

Minimize cost to maintain Annual cost to operate US $ 2 0

Functionality 9 Decreases turbidity

Turbidity is decreased Percentage Decrease % >50% >75%

Functionality

9 Decreases total suspended solids

Total suspended solids decreased

Percentage Decrease % >50% >75%

Functionality

3 Does not negatively affect the taste of the water

No negative taste of water

Percent of people who say water tastes the same or better

% >50% >75%

Safety 3 No hazardous releasesDoesn't produce hazardous release, no chemicals added

Binary (Yes/No) - - No

Functionality 3 Use Scenarios

Provides enough water for family of 5, daily Flowrate lpm 0.0394 0.6309

Hazardous Releases

• Review of the design

Engineering RequirementsCategor

yScore Customer Requirement Function Metric Units Margina

lTarget

Ease of Use 3 Easy to clean / rechargeEasy to prepare for use Time to clean minutes 10 5

Ease of Use 3 Easy to clean / recharge Easy to prepare for use

Number of tools required for cleaning by the end user

- 2 1

Ease of Use 3 Lightweight for transportMinimize weight of filter Weight in lbs lbs 10 5

Ease of Use 3 Has a minimal start-up period. Minimize start-up

Time elapsed between beginning of pour and first water that enters the bucket

seconds 30 10

Ease of Use 3Operates using only energy available naturally (gravity, human power, etc.)

Doesn't need power source

Binary (Yes/No) - - No

Economics 3 Filter is inexpensive Minimize cost of filter Total cost to produce US $ 25 20

Economics 3Usable by a family of 5, for 2-5 years w/out full replacement

Maximize durability of filter Mean Time To Failure

# of uses 730 3650

Economics 9

Requires no consumables for operation, except for very cheap & locally available materials (salt, soap, sand, etc.)

Minimize cost to maintain Annual cost to operate US $ 2 0

Functionality 9 Decreases turbidity

Turbidity is decreased Percentage Decrease % >50% >75%

Functionality

9 Decreases total suspended solids

Total suspended solids decreased

Percentage Decrease % >50% >75%

Functionality

3 Does not negatively affect the taste of the water

No negative taste of water

Percent of people who say water tastes the same or better

% >50% >75%

Safety 3 No hazardous releasesDoesn't produce hazardous release, no chemicals added

Binary (Yes/No) - - No

Functionality 3 Use Scenarios

Provides enough water for family of 5, daily Flowrate lpm 0.0394 0.6309

Flowrate

• Pilot study: collect 30 observations of the flow of 5 gallons of

water through the filtero Collect time elapsed to filter all 5 gallons, compute flow rate in lpm

• Hypothesis test (95% confidence) on the flow rate

o H0: µ >= .0394 lpm

o HA: µ > .0394 lpm

• Adjustments in sample size (i.e. additional observations) may be

necessary depending on the variance in the observed results

• If turbidity does not meet target, test at .6309 lpm for marginal

success

Project Management

Risk Assessment

Risk Curve

Plan for MSD II

Lessons Learned

The Senior Design Process

Action Items

Items Owner Due Date

Thank Yous