Analysis of the Documentation of Three Projects - Case Study Example

Case Analysis The main goal or objective is to analyze the documentation of each of the three projects. The central idea being to start afresh and also have an expertise view on each kind of work that every single team was able to present and the content it contains. The importance and the impact to be made or aimed should be to search and find the modest winner after complete evaluation or complete scrutinization. Three teams embarked on working on the same problem statement and as expected, each one of them came up with unique and different answers to the same problem statement they were all given. In particular, what is being emphasized and required from the three teams is to find out which team will be able to apply the relevant frameworks, knowledge, ability, ideas and skills so as to deliver in the end (Childs 20). The first team alphabetically which was team A came out with the problem being to design a method of burnishing a wet auto-test strip that conserves time while at the same time burnishing the entire surface. Moreover, they were to create a design that could be able to vary the normal force and rotational velocity applied to the burnishing tire. The second team came with the problem to be able to create and implement what can be attached to a tractor and was able to get or obtain its power from the tractors power of take off (PTO). This enabled the tire or tires to rotate in a manner mimicking that of a typical ABS system so that it could burnish the track surface as the tractor moves to implement along the surface. The device also has to be modified so that it can accomplish the task on the tyre. This is to allow change in the load which in this case was vertical (Risitano 27). Team C on the other hand was challenged to come up with a design for an implement that can be attached to a tractor and the latter be driven by the tractor power take-off (PTO) that could be used to rotate a tire or an implement along the surface. In addition, the device also should be able to give or provide the option to the tyre for the load that was vertical to change for furnishing process by increasing the time period between the needed burnishing, decrease the time required to burnish and in the end to be able achieve the target coefficient of friction consistently over the entirety of the test area (Ashby 34). The following were their solutions respectively in relation to the nature of the representation of the problems above. Each team came up with a dynamic way or solution to their problem and was all determined to carry the day. Team A developed a dual rear wheel assembly of a Ford 8.8 in rear end. The implement accomplishes its goal by burnishing over a short period by utilizing a dual wheel system. One of the benefits of this particular design is that the outer wheels can be removed if the implement is used to a dry track or higher coefficient of friction surfaces. The rear end components are standard Ford components based on the Ford 8.8 in rear end which can be narrowed. Due to narrowing the rear end, the width of the implement is able to allow the user to burnish as close to the watering system as allowed by the tractor (Ashby 38). Team B were able to develop a design that could be able to use the rotational output of the (PTO) back as the rotational input to drive one or more wheels on the burnisher. This had to make the team to modify the rear wheel drive vehicle as the PTO could act as the driveshaft which would induce the rotational motion of the wheels. This would actually solve the problem or the issue they were targeting. A driveshaft connects the PTO to the differential on the rear axle assembly. The burnisher connects or attaches to the tractor through the three point hitch that is on the machine which in this case is the tractor (Ashby 44). Team C also had to give their part and this is through trying to come up with an effective yet simple design of their own kind. They developed a block which was used to supply the normal loading. This weight is held in cradle affixed to the frame and more so centered above the axle. Moreover, a driveshaft which is connected to the tractor PTO and would transmit power to a spiral bevel gearbox affixed near the rear. This actually powers the axle and also the wheels. The focus of the report was to be able to come up with an innovative and efficient project that is able to sustain the modern world. In particular, the problem statement was aimed to consolidate all ideas together although each team had its own problem and solution which they were working on. The process or procedures employed by the teams were technical and unique with each of them working tirelessly in order to produce extraordinary products. The area where each of the teams was able to acquire their data from should be put into perspective. In other words, the citations given or provided by each of the team relating to where they were able to obtain their work from and this generally includes specific citations, web citations and much more. It is able to provide the reader of the report with necessary information on where he or she can obtain such information in the report and much more. Team A obtained data from books among other materials. Team B on its part gave credit to Clemson University Presentation: ME 402-Michelin Project. Team C had two areas to acknowledge for their data source. Language is a key factor to consider in regard to the nature how each of the reports was able to pass their message. The bottom line is what is being evaluated is if you were able to make your work easy, simple and straight to the point. Close analysis of the work produced by each of the three teams clearly makes the professional team that would be outstanding when it comes to language. In regard to grading of the team, we can be able to group the work produced by the teams. The total outcome depends on the general view of each step taken from scratch until the accomplishment of this task. The final machine or product made is also gauged according to its performance. The criteria followed is rigorous and efficient but also successful in all of the teams. This should be considered in terms of the input and the output. The input should be very minimal in order to be able to produce a huge quantity when it comes to the output. All the three teams were able to compete almost equally and thus to come up with a grade A project is rather difficult or complex.However, what can be concluded is that one of the teams went against the odds to produce a dynamic solution after applying their different mechanisms. Team B proved to be of class A while the remaining two teams can be said to belong to B. Evaluation shows that work done all the three team was superb excellent since they all were possible to produce an easy read manuscript. This is assured by lack of difficult words. The language used is rather simple and can be understood by the general public due to the simple structuring of the sentences and use of the correct grammar. These facts combined makes the work to be simple and easy to read. Each of the teams was much focused and to determine the winner would be quite a difficult task. However, it should be noted that in every competition there must be a winner and to determine who it is requires close watch and analysis across the board. Something which is clear is that all the teams tried to apply and focus most of its energy on creating the excellent machine. To sum up, it is very clear that the project that carries the day after an excellent job of evaluating and analyzing the work is the best of the best. No doubt that the winner amongst the three teams had gone an extra mile to gather ideas, necessary information required and in the end to create such a magnificent and wonderful report (Risitano 27). Works Cited Ashby, Michael. Materials Selection in Mechanical Design. London: Butterworth-Heinemann, 2004. Childs, Peter. Mechanical Design. London: Butterworth-Heinemann, 2003. Risitano, Antonio. Mechanical Design. London: CRC Press, 2011. Read More