Spatial and temporal spectrums are useful as a first step to breaking down systems, but quickly run into limits. Energy is likely a particularly useful spectrum to categorize our design alternatives within the context of this project. Consider how the Advanced Research Project Administration for Energy (ARPA-E) classifies energy conversion devices:

ARPA-E paradigm chart

Let’s take 15 minutes in our sub-teams and try to fill as many of the squares as possible with designs concepts for our sub-assemblies. An excel version of this is posted to the ME 316 slack thread. If you have an integration system like PLC, piping, or Box/container, try to think about how a design in each of these categories would change how you integrate with the sub-system.

This exercise gives us more possible design paradigms that we can populate our house of quality with from Lesson 7.

Information flows are yet another way we can breakdown the design. Information allows us to think about how many layers a sensing system (for example) may need to be resilient to hacking or terrorism. Some designs necessitate a high degree of parallel processes in order to quickly adapt to change.

For Friday you’ll need to work with your reporters to begin upload the following to your team’s page on the website:

  1. Your sub-assembly’s needs/motivation statement.
  2. The prior art/status quo for your sub-assembly.
  3. You Design specification, including a narrative to accompany your sub-assembly’s house of quality.
  4. A design ideation section describing the spectrum of possible designs for your sub-assembly.

We’ll start the process of down-selecting on Friday.