Lab 5

Concept Screening Matrix

Success Criteria	Reference	Design A	Design B	Design C	Design D	Design E
Stability	0	+	0	+	0	–
Efficiency	0	0	0	0	0	0
Amount of Material	0	–	+	–	+	+
Durability	0	+	0	+	+	+
Safety	0	0	–	+	–	+
Sum +’s	0	2	1	3	2	3
Sum 0’s	5	2	3	1	2	1
Sum -‘s	0	1	1	1	1	1
Net Score	0	1	0	2	1	2
Continue	Combine	Yes	No	Yes	Revise	Yes

Concept Scoring Matrix

Column1		Reference		Design A		Design C		Design D		Design E
Success Criteria	Weight	Rating	Weighted Score	Rating	Weighted Score	Rating	Weighted Score	Rating	Weighted Score	Rating	Weighted Score
Stability	0.3	3	0.9	4	1.2	4	1.2	3	0.9	2	0.6
Efficiency	0.1	2	0.2	2	0.2	2	0.2	2	0.2	2	0.2
Amount of Material	0.15	2	0.3	1	0.15	1	0.15	3	0.45	5	0.75
Durability	0.2	3	0.6	4	0.8	5	1	4	0.8	4	0.8
Safety	0.25	3	0.75	4	1	4	1	2	0.5	4	1
Total Score			2.75		3.35		3.55		2.85		3.35
Continue		No		No		Develop		No		Develop

The team chose to look at stability because balance is an important aspect for an AEV. If any given model couldn’t balance then it would not be able to run all together. Stability also ties in with safety, another aspect the team considered. If the chosen model was not safe then it would not be a good solution to the problem at hand since it deals with transportation. Additionally, amount of material used is important since cost is a constraint for the project. Efficiency is also important because of the AEV is inefficient it could be made more efficient by adjusting the design so there was not as much resistance. Efficiency could also play a part in speed since time is another constraint. Lastly, durability was considered since the AEV model has to go through a lot of testing before the final run. If it cannot last through testing it would not be an effective solution.

2. Through the screening process design B had the lowest score. A big concern for design B was that it was less safe than the sample AEV. However it did use less material than some of the other designs. Design A had a low score on amount of material used but had good safety, stability and durability scores. Then, Design D, which also scored highly in durability, had a low score for safety, which was weighted heavily in the scoring process because it is such an important factor in transportation. Design C had good scores in each of the criteria. Furthermore, Design E had a high score in overall amount of material used, which most other designs lacked. It also, performed well in safety and durability, which were two of the most highly weighted areas.

3. The two designs that the team decided to develop were Design C and Design E. Design C had the highest score overall, which means it performed well in all aspects, especially those that were emphasized. Furthermore, Design E had tied for the second highest overall score but was taken forward over design A because of its focus on being light weight.