Wednesday, June 4, 2008

Self Evaluation

Self Evaluation: Adjustable Oarlock

I. Project Scope
This project was undertaken to create a product, which will attempt to fulfill a specialized need, specifically, to provide a mechanism, which enables the adjustment of an oarlock fitting. As most, if not all types of oarlocks mounted on rowing vessels exhibit no form of adjustment, this product would exist as the only one of its type on the market, that market being all those who would benefit from a customized rowing experience. The customers who form this market include those who would use a dinghy to a gain access to a mooring field, fisherman who rely upon oars for silent propulsion, and any boat owner who uses oars on a regular basis.

II. Solution
The solution to this problem was the result of months of meticulous planning and design work. Three alternate solutions were constructed, and the final one selected after weighing the individual pros and cons of each solution, the exploded view visible in figure 1. The chosen solution is constructed of ¼ inch steel flats of different sizes. These steel flats were tapped with ½ inch holes at regular intervals, which serve as access for the oarlock to be placed through. The central hole is reserved for a stainless steel bolt, which attaches through the steel flat and into the vessel’s mounting brackets. Small portions of steel flats were welded at right angles on the bottom of the main steel flat, to prevent the oarlock from twisting under pressure of use. The design was relatively easy to construct, and the pieces were fitted together relatively quickly. This is beneficial if the design were ever to be replicated for purposes of mass production.

III. Design Discrepancies
The final product evolved over the course of construction, with the steel model having several design characteristics not present in the design plans. Likewise, the design plans include provisions for other pieces of metal that were discarded in the final incarnation of the design. The most noticeable difference between the two designs is the absence of two 1.5” pieces of metal attached to the undersides of the steel flat, these pieces are present in the wooden model, figure 2. These pieces of metal were designed to provide a more stable base for the oarlocks, but were removed from the product after it was discovered that these pieces would not allow the design to fit the test vessel. The design plans also called for a much smaller hole for the central bolt, before it was determined that a full 1/2” bolt would represent the best choice for the design. The final element of change, not present in the blueprints, was the addition of two 3” pieces of 1.5” steel flats, welded at right angles to the base of the steel flat. These pieces of metal prevented the block from twisting under use, and are vital for the design’s success.



IV. Successes & Failures
A project of such scope and scale, taking over a year from start to finish, obviously involves a great deal of both success and failure. During the course of completing this project, I experienced leaps and bounds, but for every success there was a drawback of some kind. My first three designs, brought in from the summer, were unusable in their first iterations. A great deal of design would need to take place before these designs would be worked into something worthwhile. On the flip side, my summer work included obtaining the test vessel for the project, which meant I would not have to spend my on money on providing a boat for use in this project. I was also fortunate to find a website where I could order the steel flats at an affordable price rate.
These successes were negated somewhat by the bigger overestimations and failures during the construction phase. These include the retrofitting of a ½’ bolt to the steel block, as the original bolt was deemed to small in diameter to effectively work in the final project. Another consequence of the design was the use of ¼’ steel without regard to my ability to cut it. I ended up using a manual hacksaw to cut through the steel, an experience I do not wish to repeat. The process was slow and did not provide much room for detail, but did rend the large piece of steel into two workable sizes effectively enough. The final failure worth mentioning is the lack of regard for the test vessels existing oarlocks, which consisted of two mismatched pairs, with the starboard side oarlocks having been repaired at some point in the past.

V. Learning from Mistakes
The mistakes mentioned above represent the majority of the failures in design and construction, and although they were almost always difficult to work through, did not prevent the finalization of the design and construction of the overall product. Mistakes such as not accurately measuring the inside of the test vessel and estimating the dimensions in general, are preventable in the future through more careful and conscious work. Other failures, such as having to saw through ¼” thick steel with nothing but a hacksaw, are unfortunate, but impossible to correct outside of obtaining more effective methods of cutting through steel. The project has made me aware of the intricacies of building a product from paper to finished prototype, and has revealed several aspects of the design process, which I was not aware of prior, including the selection & rejection process of three or more alternative solutions.

VI. Additional Learning
Through development of the adjustable oarlock, I set time aside for the restoration of the test vessel itself. A 1976 Skimmar, the dinghy was in rough shape when received, and I had always intended to restore the boat along with the development of my senior project. Through its restoration, I learned several key skills, which include but are not limited to:
• Fiberglass repair- several holes repaired in the hull of the test vessel with epoxy resin products
• Painting- application of heavy duty, weather resistant paint to the inside of the test vessel
• Rub Rail- attached a 20’ length of rub rail to the outside of the boat, using stainless steel screws, pre-drilling each hole.


VII. Design Flaws
Despite best intentions, there exist a few design flaws on the final product. The most glaring of these flaws is the design of the two pieces of metal, which act to steady the oarlock under operation. These pieces of metal push up against the sides of the test vessel, preventing the steel from twisting. As they are designed, these pieces dig into the painted surface of the hull, unfortunately scratching the test vessel. This flaw could be corrected with the addition of padding along the piece of metal, which would protect the surface of the hull quite effectively. The second design flaw is that of the central bolt. On the test vessel, this bolt, once attached to the boat, remains too close to the side of the hull, making the attachment of a nut quite difficult, as seen in figure 4. This could be corrected with a smaller sized bolt, or a shorter bolt, to match the curvature of the hull.

XIIIA. Personal Improvement: Problem Solving Skills
This project was designed to test a student’s ability to break a complex task down into component steps, and assign priority to each of these steps in turn. This part of the project was seldom discussed and left to the individual to determine the best way to proceed. Throughout this process, I attempted to make decisions based on what was required of the project as a whole, thinking more of the completed model instead of the individual steps. This taught an important lesson in problem solving, as I was often required to solve the problems that cropped up during the course of the project. I learned to work methodically, fixing each problem as they occurred, and found that steady and consistent work was the most vital ingredient in the building of my final solution.

XIIIB. Personal Improvement: Communication Skills
This self-evaluation represents one of the final pieces of any length which I will need to write for my Systems Engineering class, and is a reflection of what I have discovered in my writing over the course of this year. I have attempted to present the facts in a clear, concise manner, with few extraneous facts to confuse the reader. This style of writing attempts to follow the guidelines that “technical writing” provides, and while it is not my preferred style of explicating what needs to be said, it is nonetheless effective for what needed to be conveyed.




XIIIC. Personal Improvement: Organizational Skills
Proficient organizational skills are essential in any type of long-term project, and the design and construction of the adjustable oarlock was no exception. I attempted to budget my time effectively, so I would have ample opportunity to address all parts of the design process fully, but this was not always the case. In reality, it was far easier to complete work just before the deadline, and to spend an exorbitant amount of time on activities that were not pertinent to the overall construction of my final design. I see the time spent on this project as a learning experience, one that I will carry with me through my years at college, where my organizational skills will truly be tested.

IX. Conclusion
It was difficult for me to imagine how my final product would look, even after months of preparation. It is also hard for me to imagine the final days of my senior year, but this self evaluation has given me a chance to look back on the time I have spent in the drafting and design of my senior project, through the pitfalls and successes, and provided me with a chance o objectively examine my experience as a whole. I am quite pleased with what I have accomplished over the course of my final year at high school, and the results of my project play a large role in my optimistic look at senior year in general. I look forward to attempting similar style projects in my college career, and beyond. I know full well that I have been adequately prepared for this task, and view the future as yet another challenge just waiting to be undertaken.




Monday, April 28, 2008

Calendar: MP-Omega

Week of April 28th
-Complete Calendar of Events Due 4/28
-Continue work on adjustable oarlock
-Set up possible time for welding
-Start work on Testing Report
-Update Log

Week of May 5th
-Continue construction
-Finish Testing Report due 5/8
-Visit & Update Mentor
-Update Log

Week of May 12th
-Finish welding by this week
-Work on exhibit for next week
-Update Log

Week of May 19th
-Exhibit due 5/20
-Update Log
-Visit & Update Mentor

Week of May 26th
-Write Progress update
-Update Log

Week of June 2nd
-Write up all remaining mentor contacts to date
-Possible date for testing of vessel
-Update Log
-Visit & Update Mentor




Week of June 9th
-Mentor contact due 6/4
-Add final details to test vessel
-Possible date for testing finished model
-Final Exam due 6/10
-Update Log

Week of June 16th
-Graduate

Friday, April 4, 2008

Construction Images


Steel Flat measured for cutting



Steel Flat before cutting


Steel Flat cut into 2 equal parts




Steel Flat with 1/2" holes drilled through



Unfinished product with oarlock mounted

Wednesday, April 2, 2008

Press Release

Assessment of Project Progress
Math, Science & Technology Application

Contact: Brian Rees FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Period 5/6 19 MARCH 2008

Systems Engineering II: Adjustable Oarlock

Sandy Hook, NJ (3/19/08)
Brian Rees, a senior at the Marine Academy of Science & Technology, taking Systems Engineering II, and during the course of the school year, has designed and created a fully functional adjustable oarlock, designed to provide an alternative to the obsolete preexisting technology, which is currently in use worldwide. This adjustable oarlock is designed to fit into a test vessel, also provided by Mr. Rees, and will eventually be tested under real-life conditions.




Figure 1- Collection of Three Standard Oarlocks

Oars have been used to propel boats for thousands of years, from before the era of recorded history. While the technology used in production and design of these vessels has progressed through the years, the system used to lock oars into place has not changed. Brian Rees has attempted to solve this fundamental issue with the creation of a new product, which allows for one to adjust the oars in ways previously impossible.
In figure one, three separate oarlock designs are shown. These designs have existed for decades, with virtually no changes involved. In modern (and ancient) oarlock design, oars are placed inside of small metal hoops, and are securely fastened to the boat through the vessel’s oarlock fitting. These fittings cannot move, and the oars can be hard to manage for smaller rowers, or cumbersome to row for larger people. Personal preference could demand the oars be placed further forward or backward, but even modern oarlocks make no concessions for adjustments. This is due, in part, to the wide range of owners and operators who take advantage of the versatility and utility of rowboats, requiring boat designers to craft vessels which are comfortable for the greatest range of people: Those outside this range will have a reduced level of comfort, and as such, the accessibility of the design will be significantly reduced.
Through careful research, Mr. Rees attempted to draft a model that could solve the problem at hand. Combining personal experience with various published sources, Brian identified several areas critical to the success of any potential design. These areas included: Use of marine grade materials, ability to be removed at any time without tools, and a semi-modular design. Based on these, and additional criteria, Brian created three separate solutions to the problem, each with their own benefits and drawbacks.
The three solutions followed the same general guidelines, but each solved the problem in a different way. The first solution involved the use of metal and wood to achieve the desired goal. Wood is easy to work with when compared with other mediums, such as steel or fiberglass. However, wood is somewhat flimsy when compared to metals, so the design incorporated metal into the wood dominant design, reinforcing the product at several key points. The second design presented is more conventional, using steel flats in its construction. This design is more difficult to construct then a wooden hybrid, requiring the use of solder, and possibly light welding. This more complex design is a lighter, more durable mechanism, which is more resistant to both the actions of the marine environment and repeated, heavy use. The final design involves taking existing technology, namely, a sailboat rail track, and adapting it into use for the adjustable oarlock. Since the hardware is already available, the design process will concentrate on modifying the T-Tracks, instead of designed an entirely new product.
Having three possible solutions in mind, it was time to narrow the field to one model to be put into production. Based on the pros and cons of each individual idea, the final solution was chosen as an all steel design, with a mockup constructed (see figure two) to highlight the design aspects of the product. Construction would begin soon afterwards, with steel flats ordered to the design specifications required. Construction could not continue, however, without assistance from an experienced mentor. Mr. Rees’s mentor has had years of experience working around boats of all shapes and sizes, and has owned the largest marina in Fair Haven, NJ for several years. This mentor assisted Mr. Rees throughout the project, giving helpful advice and input throughout the entire planning phase. When construction began, this mentor assisted Brian by giving general advice as to how to properly manufacture the product in preparation for use in the marine environment. This project could not have been successfully completed without the help of this mentor, and many of the design elements are drawn straight from his suggestions.



Figure 2- Finished Mockup, topside

With construction nearly complete, Mr. Rees has examined the mathematic, scientific, and technical features of this project, and how the completion of the adjustable oarlock would best exemplify these aspects. Rudimentary mathematical skills were required to place holes in the steel flats, taking into account balance and symmetry. The scientific aspect most pertinent to completion of this project was that of ergonomics, previously taught earlier in the Systems II curriculum. The oarlock was designed from the outset to provide a comfortable, accessible product, with the end user’s experience being of chief concern. The technical aspects of the project were of the utmost importance, involving the use of the drill press, hacksaw, and eventually, welding tools. The skills taught in the Systems Engineering course played an important role in the manufacture of Brian’s project. The process is illustrated below, in Figure 3, where the steel flat has been cut in half carefully, with the use of a hacksaw.



Figure 3- Steel Flat Prepared for Further Construction

At this stage, Brian’s project is nearing completion, with only minor welding required to complete the end product. Mr. Rees plans to test the final model using a test vessel he will provide, so the prototype can undergo the stresses it would experience in the course of normal use. This period of testing will reveal any flaws in the final design, which will be corrected as needed. This project is the result of over a year’s worth of work, and has only a few small steps before reaching completion. Mr. Rees is excited and motivated to finish his endeavors, and looks forward to the successful test of the finished adjustable oarlock.


For more details about the Adjustable Oarlock, contact Brian Rees at brianjrees@gmail.com, or visit the Marine Academy of Science and Technology at http://mast.mcvsd.org

Monday, February 4, 2008

Calender: MP3

Week of February 4th
-Complete Calender of Events Due 2/05
-Order Construction Materials
-Begin Layout for for Weblog Portfolio
-Add existing images to weblog portfolio
-Update Log

Week of February 11th
-Begin Construction (if materials are recieved)
-Construction: Cut Material to size
-Visit & Update Mentor
-Update Log

Week of February 18th
-Construction: Cut holes in steel flats
-Update Log

Week of February 25th
-Construction: Begin Welding Process
-Update Log
-Visit & Update Mentor

Week of March 3rd
-Construction: Continue Welding Process
-Begin Work on Press Release
-Update Log

Week of March 10th
-Construction: Finish Welding Process
-Press Release: Write Introduction, Body, Conclusion
-Press Release: Add Applicable Images/Illustrations
-Update Log
-Visit & Update Mentor

Week of March 17th
-Press Release Due 3/19
-Bring Test Vessel to Tech Lab
-Construction: Fitting Product to Vessel
-Update Log

Week of March 24th
-Spring Break

Week of March 31st
-Presentations Begin 4/02
-Prepare for Presentations
-Update Log
-Visit & Update Mentor
-Complete Mentor Contacts

Friday, January 18, 2008

Plan of Procedures

Adjustable Oarlock Design Process

Mounting oarlocks in different spots on a vessel requires a sturdy mounting block, capable of working with the stresses that occur from normal operation. Steel pieces offer the greatest strength for the lowest cost, making it the ideal choice for use in this project. Steel construction will be used throughout, from the mounting block, to the bolts and washers used to secure the assembly to the vessel hull. Knowledge of metalworking, specifically, welding, is required for the project’s success. Several holes must be tapped through solid steel, requiring careful attention to detail by the builder. There are two oarlock blocks required for the project, with both sides undergoing construction simultaneously. If both sides are built at the same time, it will be easier to apply similar techniques to both units instead of finishing one before beginning another.



Plan of Procedures:

A. Material Processing Steps:
1. Receive uncut steel flats in 40” size
2. Measure & cut 40”x 3” x ¼” steel flat into two 20” sections
3. Measure & cut 40” x 1.5” x ¼” steel flats into four 20” sections
4. Measure & cut 1” diameter hole into 3” steel flat
i. Measure 2” from end of flat to center of hole
ii. Measure 2” from center of hole, cut second hole
iii. Repeat cuts: four holes from side
5. Measure and cut access hole for stainless steel bolt
i. Measure 10 inches from center
ii. Cut hole wide enough for SS Bolt
6. Measure and cut 1” diameter hole for remainder of flat
i. Measure 2” from center of SS Bolt hole
ii. Cut 1” diameter hole in flat
iii. Repeat cuts: four holes from center
7. Repeat steps 4-6 for second 3” steel flat
B. Assembly Procedures
1. Clamp 1.5” steel flat at 0.5” from outside of 3” steel flat
2. Weld 1.5” steel flat into place onto 3” steel flat
3. Clamp 1.5” steel flat at 1.5” from outside of 3” steel flat, opposite of first 1.5” flat
4. Weld second 1.5” steel flat into place onto 3” steel flat
5. Repeat steps 1-4 for second steel flat
6. Mount washer and bolt assembly through bolt hole on steel flat
7. Mount completed oarlock assembly to vessel through existing oarlock hole
8. Secure device to boat with attachment of steel nut to stainless steel bolt
C. Finishing Steps
1. Mount desired oarlocks through holes in steel flat
2. Secure oarlocks to steel flat using existing cotter pin system
3. (if present on chosen oarlock)









Thursday, January 10, 2008

MST Report

Math, Science & Technology:
Adjustable Oarlock


Upon completing the design of the final solution, there is often abundance in the amount of science and mathematics used to develop the project. In solving the question of an adjustable oarlock, a variety of applied sciences were used to better judge the value of the presented solutions. The very design of the final solution comes from simple mathematic equations, combined with use of technology to solve a problem which has no existing remedy. The careful use of science in conjunction with the technology requires a great deal of development, and these developments have been carefully documented in this paper. From the basic equations used to form the outline of the chosen solution, to the careful study of ergonomic and biometrics, which lead to the small details present in the final model, and includes the technology which has been designed as a result of the application of science.
The leading scientific cause that concerns the use of an adjustable oarlock is that of ergonomics. Comfort, or lack thereof, is of primary concern for the user of this product. If the adjustable oarlock is awkward to use or otherwise ungainly, there is no reason to continue using it. Human beings come in a variety of sizes, and products which cannot cater to this broad spectrum will fail in an open market. The adjustable oarlock has been designed from the outset to be a product which can be easily used by many types of rowers, and its very purpose is to improve upon the rigid and anti-ergonomic design of the original, basic oarlock. The final design is anthropometrically sound, and includes features which are not limited by user size and body type. The final model presents a product that can be easily adapted to any user requirement, with quick and easy adjustment. Ergonomically, the mechanism must conform to the hull patterns of a wide range of vessels, and must also project no dangerous points or contain any sharp protrusions that may inadvertently injure the operator during normal operating procedures. Since the oarlock is attached to the boat using a nearly universal socket/bolt system, there is little doubt as to the products ability to be used in a wide range of vessels, expanding the suitable application of the adjustable oarlock.
It was equally important to consider the biometric factors of design, as the adjustable oarlock is simply an improvement over an existing technology. If a customer spends the money to purchase an adjustable oarlock, it is assumed that they already have a vessel which uses standard oarlocks, so the adjustable product must justify the expenditure of additional capital, as typical oarlocks are an available, cheaper alternative. The improved product must represent a marked improvement over the original design, or the expense cannot be warranted. Building the product out of superior materials and taking careful care to construct using professional methods will only increase the appeal of the product. The adjustable oarlock can be seen as an add-on, but one that is required in order to obtain maximum performance in any vessel designed to be rowed.
The mathematical portion of this project consists of simple arithmetic equations, each one determining how the end product will function. Measurements were taken of each critical aspect of the vessel relating to oarlock function, and these dimensions were used to create the original drawings of the adjustable oarlock. Working with an overall length of 20 inches (shown in Fig 1), determined to be the ideal length when concerned with adaptability among different vessel types. A shorter length may prove unstable, and a longer length may cause compatibility issues. Inside these 20 inches, multiple holes are to be drilled, with equal spacing between each hole. The final design offers a one inch diameter hole, with two inches from each center of the hole to the next. This configuration was utilized due to the limited space and a desire for symmetry. With four holes on either side of a central bolt, the final design presents a clean, streamlined design. Mathematics played another role in the design of the final product, when concerning the mounting of the adjustable block to the original vessel. The length of the stainless steel bolt can be changed depending upon the situation (Fig 2), with overall emphasis on a modular design. Everything, from the size of the oarlock mounting holes to the major dimensions of the device, is designed for use among many types of vessels and oar types.
The technology aspect of the adjustable oarlock design relies heavily upon the choice of material. The design can be completed with some degree of success across a large number of material choices, but using an affordable, available material such as steel has many benefits. Using rudimentary welding techniques (Fig 3) in conjunction with various other metalworking tools, the product can be completed quickly, with minimum effort. Other materials, such as aluminum, may be cheaper and easier to work with, but lack the durability required to withstand the pressures of a working within a marine environment. Using quality materials will extend the life of such a product, and ensure that the product will remain in a functional state for years to come.

With the application of science expressed in technology, and a grounding of mathematics to form the standard design of the product, the adjustable oarlock has a great deal of support. The final design is a result of many alternative designs and has been selected from a series of different solutions. The end result is a product which has been refined to best provide for needs of the potential customer, and represents the evolution of ideas from brainstorming to the future creation of a prototypical example.