Project 3.3.

1 Marble Sorter
Written by Michael Diaz
Michael Diaz, Jugal Amodwala, Michael Friedmann, Rama
Hassabelnabi
Principles of Engineering
Westwood High School
3/27/16

Design Problem:
The National Recreation Park Association needs a device that will sort
recyclable material for them. The team is tasked with designing and creating
a working machine to do so.
The device must be fully automated, be made of VEX material and instructor
approved items, be able to sort commingled materials into separated holding
bins, have the marbles be under control throughout the process, have at
least four different materials able to be sorted (wood, aluminum, glass,
white plastic, or metal), and must complete the task in a maximum of two
minutes.

Brainstorming Ideas:

My design works like this:

Once poured into our funnel, the marbles flow down the main bar until it gets
to the first motor, then one is quickly released. It is stopped at the next gate
where it is measured via the light sensor for its value (The value is
determined by the amount of light that passes through the marble). Once
the value is determined, the second motor will open allowing the marble to
drop unto the other bar. Then, it will sort the marble accordingly (to the light
sensor set value). The machine will drop be dropped into the correct bin by
the tilting and tipping of the turn dial

Decision Matrix

We based our decision on simplicity of the design (how hard it would be to

make it), Usability (if it was actually usable), Aesthetics (if it looked good
while also doing the work), Feasibility (the chance of it actually completing
the task), and build time (the amount of time it would take to build).
We then rated it on a scale of 1-5 (1 being the worst, 5 being the best) and
decided Ramas Idea was the most promising.
The reason we choose these things are simple. We chose simplicity because
this was crucial to making our project in the allotted time. Usability was to
make sure it was actually useable even if everyone but one teammate was
absent. Aesthetics was to make sure it looked okay and not like a pile of
trash. Not the most important aspect but we found it an important part. The
feasibility was chosen due to us needing something that would actually work
in the first place. This is probably the most important part. If not feasible,
there is now way we could actually get a good grade and or complete the
task. Finally build time was chosen because of time constraints and the point
that building was one of the largest and most important parts of the project.
Most of the project is based off building the actual machine. The less time,
the better.

Final Design Solution:

We chose this idea because it seemed rather easy to make unlike all our
other idea. Plus, it had the highest success rate and had the best design in
general due to it combining the best techniques and ideas from our other
solutions. The final reason was that it included many good elements and held
aspects of all of our other ideas combined. This made sure that it worked
really well or, in theory worked very well due to its diversity.

The marbles are first poured into the funnel, then they fall onto the
caterpillar track. One at a time they are dropped onto the main track. Metal
marbles will be pulled off the track by a magnet on the side and a constant
motor will hit them. Non-ferrous materials will continue and be stopped at a
sensor that will utilize a light sensor that will read the light value that passes
through the marble. The light detected will move a cup for the material
(based on the light value) that will collect the marble. This process is
continued until all the marbles are sorted.

Design Modifications:

Our original idea at first didnt change much. We had to bend pieces of metal
to add the line follower and flashlight and we ultimately had to change our
approach to the magnet idea due to it not working.
Then, after I was gone at UIL for a day, my teammates completely changed
our original idea. They shortened the main track from its original size and
added sides to the caterpillar tracks. They also added a second base to the
project. After learning this, we also scrapped the idea of a treadmill with the
cups on it and instead added an encoder and motor to the end along with
three cups on a gear to catch the marbles. This entire system was then
attached to one of the main tracks supports to keep it stable and
operational.
Along with these designs we changed our magnet grabber. We instead put a
motor with a magnet on the end and put a large green cup that would work
to remove the marbles from the magnet as they were picked off the track.
This changed again later due to a slope change. This meant we added a
small pipe to the underside of the green cup because the marble motor could
no longer reach the cup without interacting with the main track.
Near the end of our project, we changed our funnel idea to a water bottle
and then later to a file cabinet folder. We also added tape to the sides of the
track so marbles wouldnt fall out and we even added a cardboard cover to
our line follower sensor area. Similarly we cut off a piece of metal that was
blocking the caterpillar track. Also, at the funnel entrance we added a servo
that would control the flow of marbles. Finally, Michael F. added a bump
switch that was never connected and didnt do anything.

Final Design:

This machine sorted zero marbles. None were sorted at all.

3 marbles passed correctly through the machine. However this was achieved
by one of our group members raising a bar. So 0 actually made it through on
their own.
It took two minutes to do nothing. No time was recorded due to its failure.

ROBOTC Program:

Design Process:
1. Define Problem: During this step I looked around online at ideas to
get a better sense of what we were doing and I re-read the rubric
several times to truly understand our task
2. Generate Concepts: I used all the data I had acquired and I put
together a solution in a sketch. I then put in theory how it was
supposed to work under the picture and had it signed off by Mr.
Landers. I also made sure the technology needed was available
3. Develop a Solution: My group then came together and we chose a
design to use. We used a design matrix to pick the best design and
then added any modifications we wanted to add. After doing this, we
drew a new sketch of the idea and had that too signed off by Mr.
Landers.
4. Construct and Test Prototype: We then started construction on our
first idea. After a few days of little progress, we changed our idea and
chose a new design, throughout this process we made several changes
(see Design Modification). We then added the code to it and tested it
over a period of two days to see if it worked correctly and did what it
was supposed to do.
5. Evaluate Solution: On the morning before the final presentation it
worked perfectly and did the required process. However, minutes
before the final presentation, it stopped working and we didnt have
time to run the fixes needed and therefore we went into the
presentation with a broken machine.

6. Present Solution: On the day to present our solution we ultimately

failed due to our system not working and thus we failed that part of the
project.

Team Evaluation:
1. Jugal Amodwala- Jugal was a very important part to our team. Although
the two of us often argued on many things, we also were able to work
together and solve many problems with our machine. He was also one
of the people who came into work after and before school many times.
Jugal did follow the group norms and did what he was supposed to do.
2. Rama Hassabelnabi- Rama was our lead programmer and she wrote
most of our code. She did her share of work. Other than this, she
followed the group norms and did a good job.
3. Michael Friedmann- Michael was one of our lead builders and was
responsible for many of our fixes. He came in many times in the
morning to help work on the project and he was very useful to getting
it working. He followed the group norms and did his job.
4. Michael Daz- I was a useful part of our group and came into every
morning or afternoon meeting assigned. Although I got in
disagreements with our team sometimes, we were ultimately able to
get through it all. I was a lead builder and helped solve many problems
that we encountered when constructing our project. I did my job and I
followed the group norms as well.

Reflection:
a) If we could do anything differently we would have come up with
an idea that worked better. We would have tested heat on the
line follower and had done further tests on how to pick up steel
marbles and remove them from our track. We also would have
tested our code more and had been prepared for any value
changes.
b) The most challenging aspect was having the line follower value
change every test. It was very annoying and hard to counter. We
had no fix and had to constantly change our program. Even then,
we had a hard time finding a fixed number as the value for the
marbles would change every two minutes.
c) I learned that in an engineering situation, there are many
variables and it is very hard to come up with working solutions to
a problem. Also, making a working solution takes a lot of time
and many tests to finally get right.

d) The main challenge in general was that we all had differing ideas

on certain things and we all had to come to an agreement so that

we could get the project done. The other main challenge was it
was often hard to see what our teammate was saying or trying to
express. Another problem was dealing with a team member
when they were angry and moody. These confrontations always
ended with yelling and lots of tension.