We Fling Foo Parabolic Food Aid Delivery SystemPFADS

1
We Fling FooParabolic Food Aid Delivery
System(PFADS)

• By
• Rob Berkeley
• Chris Giuffra
• University of the Pacific

2
Outline

• Introduction
• Project Objectives
• Preliminary Ideas
• Refinement
• Decision/Implementation
• Construction Testing
• Results
• Improvements
• Conclusion
• Acknowledgments

3
Introduction

• To build a scale model of a PHADS that will carry
  a Food Aid Package (FAP).
• It will have to roll down a hill, hit a wall, and
  then launch a FAP into a village over a
  mountain.

4
Introduction

• Constraints
• Weight
• Size
• Cost

5
Introduction

• Criteria
• Accuracy
• Weight
• Consistence

6
Project Objectives

• Roll Down Ramp
• Throw a Food Aid Package over a 3.5 gap and over
  a 62 wall and land on an X
• Do not exceed target point

7
Preliminary Design
8

• Advantages
• Simple structure
• Easily adjustable
• Low cost to build
• Disadvantages
• Possibly heavy
• Catapult arm breakable

9
(No Transcript)
10

• Advantages
• Potentially very accurate
• Easy angle adjustment
• More stability
• Disadvantages
• Harder to build
• More difficult to create release mechanism

11
(No Transcript)
12

• Advantages
• light weight
• Reliable release mechanism
• Accuracy
• Disadvantages
• Strength
• High center of gravity

13
Refinement
14
(No Transcript)
15
Refinement

• Box holder
• Catapult design
• Release mechanism
• Elastic band

16
Decision

• Design that worked best
• No wheels
• Weight on back
• Change angle of release

17
Decision
18
Results

• First and second time
• Did not go over wall
• Did not flip over into river
• Released package
• Third time without wall
• Went down ramp and released package very close to
  X.

19
Improvements

• Better angle adjustment
• Stronger design
• Lower center of gravity

20
Conclusion

• Overall it performed well even though it did not
  go high enough
• Operated in a satisfactory way
• Need a way to adjust angle more precisely

21
Acknowledgements

• Dana
• Kristel
• UOP Machine Shop