You are on page 1of 29

1

Modified Rotator Type Pipe Holder

A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the Industrial Technology
Don Honorio Ventura Technological State University

In partial fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree
Bachelor of Science in Industrial Technology

By
Infante, Richard Mark M.
Andaya, John Jerome
Medina, Rafael Jr
Pabericio, Jenson
Waji, Mark Bren

September 2014

2

APPROVAL SHEET
This undergraduate thesis entitled “MODIFIED ROTATOR TYPE PIPE
HOLDER”, prepared and submitted by Richard Mark Infante, John Jerome Andaya,
Rafael Medina Jr, Jenson Pabericio, Mark Bren Waji, in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the Degree Bachelor of Science in Industrial Technology, has been
examined and found in order and hereby recommended for acceptance and approval for
the ORAL EXAMINATION.

LEODRIGO SICAT
Academic Adviser

ADRIANO B. SINGIAN
Technical Adviser
THESIS COMMITTEE

BENIGNO LEGAMIA
Chairman
REGINO G. PUNO
Co-Chairman
PANEL OF EXAMINERS
Approved by the committee on Oral Examination with a grade of ______ on
_____________.
FORTUNATO C. CORTEZ
Chairman
ROMMEL MALIT
Member

ADRIANO B. SINGIAN
Member

Accept and approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of
Bachelor of Science in Industrial Technology.
BENIGNO LEGAMIA
Thesis Chairman

we would like to gratefully recognize the continuous support of our advisers. Adriano Singian for helping us to complete our survey in WELDERS. Mark Bren . Jenson Waji. Adriano Singian. We are forever thankful for all the personals in Welding Technology who allow us to make our project. Benigno Legamia and Mr. Their guidance helped us throughout the time of checking the manuscript and the prototype. We would like to thank our parents in supporting us and being our inspiration. The Proponents: Infante. Andaya. Fortunato C.3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Foremost. Rafael Jr. The completion of this study would not be possible without the support and guidance provided by our Professors especially to our Chairman of Thesis Committee. This would not be happen without his purpose. Richard Mark M. Pabericio. supportive friends. We are fortunate for having a supportive and caring family. Most importantly. We’re very thankful for all the blessings that he gave to us. we would like to give thanks and praise to our God who blessed us a loving family. Thank you for all the hardships that you have done to provide our needs. Cortez who believes in our ability to finish our thesis. We would like to express our sincerest gratitude to Mr. John Jerome Medina. S. Thank you for Mr. Regino Puno. Benigno Legamia and Co-Chairman Mr. Mr. helpful advisers and understanding Professors. Benigno Legamia and Mr. Dr.

4 1.11 1.…..3 Economic Significance…………………….2 Technological Significance……………………14 1..3.………… viii LIST OF TABLES ………………………………………………… ix LIST OF FIGURES ………………………………………………… x Chapter 1..………………………….8....……………….…..8.………11 1.13 1.7 1.11 1. THE PROBLEM AND REVIEW OF RELATED LITERAURES……………………………………………………….…………….....14 ..1 Foreign Literature …………….1 Educational Significance…………………….9 1..1 1.4 Synthesis ……………….2 Specific Problems ……………………….7 1..10 1...5 Conceptual Framework ………………………………….1 General Problem ………………………….6.8Significance of the Study………………………………….1Introduction…………………………...6 1.2 Local Literature …………………………….4 TABLE OF CONTENTS CONTENTS TITLE PAGE ………………………………………………… i APPROVAL SHEET ………………………………………………… ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ………………………………………………… iii ABSTRACT ………………………………………………… iv TABLE OF CONTENTS ………………………………………………… v APPENDICES ……………………………………..3.6 Statement of the Problem ……………………………….8...………………………1 1..6...2 Related Literatures …………………………………………4 1...2 Local Literature …………..………………………………………….8 1.3..11 1.3 Related Studies …………………………………………..13 1.1 Foreign Literature ………………………..3...…..7 Assumptions……..

5 1.4.3 Sampling Technique and Procedures 2.5 Administration of the Instruments 2.5 Operation and Support Phase 3. RESULT AND DISCUSSION 3.7.2 Conclusions 4.2 Interview 2.14 1.10 Operational Definition of Terms……………………………. METHOD 2.1 Types of Research 2.7.1Design of the Project 3.3 Recommendations REFERENCES APPENDIX APPENDICES Appendix A Gantt Chart Appendix B Letters Appendix C Questionnaires .3 Library Research 2.6 Analysis of Data 2.3 Cost and Benefit Analysis 3.4.2 Analysis Phase 2.9 Scope and Delimitations…………………………………….1 Planning Phase 2.1 Summary 4.1 Questionnaires 2. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4..7.4.2 Respondents of the Study 2. SUMMARY.4 Social Significance…………………………….2 Prototype of the Project 3.14 1.4 Implementation Phase 2.4Assessment of the Marketability of the Project 4.7 Methods Used in Developing the System 2.4 Research Instruments 2.3 Design Phase 2...4.15 2.7.7.4 Internet Research 2..8.

6 Appendix D Curriculum Vitae Appendix E User Manual Appendix F Sample Source Code .

how would you like use it instead of the other competing product from other companies? Table 9: How would you like to recommend our new product to a friend or colleague? Table 10: Overall.7 LIST OF TABLES Table Table 1: What do you like most about our new product? Table 2: What changes would most improve our new product? Table 3: What do you like about competing products currently available from other companies? Table 4: What changes would most improve competing products currently available from other companies? Table 5: How important is price to you when choosing this type of product? Table 6: If you would not like to use our product. are you satisfied with your experience using our new product? . why not? Table 7: What made you use our new product? Table 8: If our new product is available today.

and drill head. uses dogs (usually called jaws). Because they most often have three jaws. Drill Press The drill has been a staple in the arsenal of woodworkers. allowing the user to make uniform-depth holes in various locations on whatever material is to be drilled. or a surface to rest the materials to be drilled. spindle. The scroll plate is rotated within the chuck body by the key. This tool is made up of a base. column. and straightness. reasonably accurate centering is desired.8 CHAPTER 1 The Problem and Review of Related Literature Introduction A self-centering chuck. or to the floor. The term universal chuck also refers to this type. When accuracy is key to success. Pipe . the term three-jaw chuck without other qualification is understood by machinists to mean a self-centering three-jaw chuck. and machinists for many years. which spin and hold the bit respectively. but a floor model is typically more powerful and has more accessory options. A depth-stop may be used to prevent the bit from moving past a certain point. These arms give the user more control over the movement of the bit and make it easier to use. Also known as a bench drill. carpenters. A bench drill press is smaller and more portable. The drill press has a three-armed handle attached to the head that raises and lowers the drill bit. and the versatility of this tool has only increased in recent decades. professionals will turn to a drill press. interconnected via a scroll gear (scroll plate). every one includes a table. widths. also known as a scroll chuck. to tighten or release the work piece. the scroll engages the teeth on the underside of the jaws which moves the three jaws in unison. It is positioned below the drill spindle and head. The base can be a tabletop or it can be built-in legs made of metal. to hold onto a tool or work piece. Self-centering three-jaw chuck and key with one jaw removed and inverted showing the teeth that engage in the scroll plate. it is capable of drilling accurately spaced holes at specific depths. workbench. or a vertical drill that is fixed to a tabletop. These chucks are best suited to grip circular or hexagonal cross-sections when very fast.

tees. In common usage the words pipe and tube are usually interchangeable. but in industry and engineering. Pipe is generally manufactured to one of several international and national industrial standards. debarring tools. The term "tube" is also commonly applied to noncylindrical sections. masses of small solids.). the terms are uniquely defined. . square or rectangular tubing. slurries.e. center drills. but may be specified by any two of OD. "pipe" is the more common term in most of the world. pipe is generally specified by a nominal diameter with a constant outside diameter (OD) and a schedule that defines the thickness. cannot be formed. tube is often made to custom sizes and a broader range of diameters and tolerances. Many industrial and government standards exist for the production of pipe and tubing. Depending on the applicable standard to which it is manufactured. Tube is most often specified by the OD and wall thickness. Pipe assemblies are almost always constructed with the use of fittings such as elbows. Work can be supported on the table with a vise or hold down clamps. Both "pipe" and "tube" imply a level of rigidity and permanence. The motor turns the spindle at a speed controlled by a variable speed control dial. hollow pipe is far stiffer per unit weight than solid members. It can also be used for structural applications. whereas "tube" is more widely used in the United States.3. Height of the table can be adjusted with a table lift crank than locked in place with a table lock. i. used mainly to convey substances which can flow — liquids and gases (fluids). usually but not necessarily of circular cross-section.9 A PIPE is a tubular section or hollow cylinder. the column in turn supports a table. and so on. 1. The spindle holds a drill chuck to hold the cutting tools (drill bits. inside diameter (ID). The column also supports a head containing a motor. etc. In general. whereas a hose (or hosepipe) is usually portable and flexible.3 Related Literature 1. while tube may be formed or bent into custom configurations. or where construction is governed by codes or standards. powders..1 Foreign Literature A drill press is preferable to a hand drill when the location and orientation of the hole must be controlled accurately. A drill press is composed of a base that supports a column. While similar standards exist for specific industry application tubing. and wall thickness. For materials that are inflexible. tube assemblies are also constructed with the use of tube fittings. or the table can be swiveled out of the way to allow tall work to be supported directly on the base.

5 Statement of the Problem . also called Drilling Machine. This is through researching. doing other processes to come up with the output.4 Conceptual Framework INPUT PROCESS OUTPUT *Preparation of design of the machine *Fabrication of the Machine *Preliminary brainstorming *Reading of related literatures *Perform initial testing *Apply changes if needed *DEVELOPOMENT OF ROTATOR TYPE PIEP HOLDER *Finalize the machine *Conduct a survey *Collate data and write the results and recommendation Figure 1 Paradigm of the Study As shown in Figure 1. The drill is held in a rotating spindle and is fed into the work piece. 1. device for producing holes in hard substances. The drill may be gripped in a chuck with three jaws that move radically in unison. or it may have a tapered shank that fits into a tapered hole in the spindle. reviewing some related literatures. The next step is designing the project and what it will look like. and also.10 Drill press. the proponents of this project started by conducting initial brainstorming as to what project will be developed. and gathering the materials needed. 1. Means are always provided for varying the spindle speed and on some machines for automatically feeding the drill into the work piece. which is usually clamped in a vise resting on a table.

1 General Objectives: The main objective of the study is to introduce a Pipe Rotator Type with 3 Universal Jaws and Adopter for welders and shop owners to provide them an easy to use pipe rotator and to further facilitate the work and make a good quality product.1 General Problem Many accidents happened in the world of industry causing a disruption of the fingers. 1. These specific objectives are the solutions for the specific problems mentioned: 1. the project sought answer of the following questions: 1. hands. 2. or any other part of the body.2 Specific Objective This section states the detailed objectives of the study. 1. 1.5.6. How may the Pipe Rotator Type solve the problems concerning on how to immediate center the iron? 2. To launch a new and improved device in the market that will surely be patronized by the people. The main problem in using the normal Pipe Rotator Type is.5.6. .2 Specific Problem Specifically. How will the Pipe Rotator Type be easier and safer to use than the rotator type? 1. 1. and.6 Significance of the Study This section presents the objectives of the study that will respond to the current safety needs of the users of Pipe Rotator Type. you have to center first the iron that makes it hard to use and it slows the fabrication of time in order to make good quality product. Improved the Pipe Rotator Type. legs.7 Assumptions This section states the assumption of the proposed improved Pipe Rotator Type with 3 Universal Jaws and Adopter.11 This section shows the different problems experienced by the welders on how to center immediate the iron using the local rotator type. 1.

To the Welders and Shop Owners. The proposed project will be providing safety to the users. 1. 2.(fluid conveyance). 1.a chuck. 3. Colleges and Universities. Through the use of the developed pipe rotator type. 3 Universal Jaws .12 1.9 Scope and Limitations This project is only limited to the improvement of the existing Pipe Rotator Type by introducing a 3 Universal Jaws and Adopter. as the developed pipe rotator will help accomplishing fast-tracked projects of the government constructing new buildings and other related works in welding that will accelerate time in welding. To the School. that will be apparently benefiting from this project as this study of an advanced and developed pipe rotator will help them lessen the casualty of workers welding in construction. has jaws which can be moved simultaneously so as to grasp objects of various sizes. The proposed project will be of importance in improving the effectiveness of the Pipe Rotator Type. they can easily center the iron in lesser time to further smooth the progress of the work. who will be directly benefitting from this study. To the Private Companies.8 Significance of the Study This section presents the significance of the proposed improved Pipe Rotator Type with 3 Universal Jaws and Adopter.a powered vertical drilling machine in which the drill is pressed to the work automatically or by a hand lever. this will help them lessen casualties and time consumed in constructing new buildings as the product of this study will help the welders. a hollow cylinder following certain dimension rules .10 Definition of Terms This section presents some terms which are not widely known to different individuals of whose field is not Industrial Technology. Drill Press . Pipe . as for a lathe. To the Government Institutions. 1. The proposed project will be accepted by the industry.

13 .

1 Questionnaire The proponents formulated questions that seek to measure the marketability and usefulness of the Developed Rotator Type Pipe Holder.2 Library Research The library research undertaken by the researchers were shown on the different defined terminologies and related literatures and studies of this study.4.1 Type of Research The study was approached in a mixed experimental and descriptive manner and utilizes questionnaires that the respondents in this study answered. Included in this part are the discussions of the following: the sampling technique or how the respondents were chosen.14 CHAPTER II MATERIALS AND METHOD This chapter of the study illustrates the materials and methodology or approach used by the researchers to develop the project and collect data. thus the degree of acceptance of the possible end users on the developed product is evaluated. They were a great help to the researchers because they serve as guide in the development of the study. 2.4.2 Respondents of the Study A total of fifty (50) respondents was the target number of samples of the researchers where data were gathered from. Respondents were practitioners from various machine shops.4 Research Instruments The sources of data in this study were as follows: 2. 2. 2. instructors and selected students on technical schools who were directly involved in the mechanical technology programs or operation. 2. . the researchers were able to explore an existing technology and incorporate new features to it and evaluate whether the added feature really helped and improved what the technology is primarily intended to. instruments used and procedure how this study progressed. 2.3 Sampling Technique and Procedure These 50 respondents were selected through purposive sampling. With this mixed method.

dia.6. 1 P360 P360 P11. 2. tools.3 Bill of Materials of the equipment.5 Analysis of Data Data gathered were tabulated and analysed using frequency and present distribution to assess the marketability and usability of the DEVELOPED ROTATOR TYPE PIPE HOLFER. 1 P180 P180 Welding Rod 2 P50 P100 Grinding Disk 2 P55 P110 Cutting Disk 2 P110 P220 Angular Bar 3 P280 P840 Screw and Nut 7 P17 P119 Mild Steel 1 P180 P180 Pipe 3 ½ Inc. The project requires a total cost of Php.919 .6 Technical Aspect of the Project The step by step processes on how the researchers develop the DEVELOPMENT OF A ROTATOR TYPE PIPE HOLFER: 2.919 broken down as follows: MATERIAL QUANTITY UNIT COST TOTAL 3Universal Jaw 1 P6.2 Working drawing of the project drawn to scale on the following perspectives: front view. side view and other views.11. 2. top view.000 P3.3 Internet Research Supplemental research using available professional sites in the internet was also undertaken by the researchers for this study. 2. Dia. supplies and materials to be used.6.4. 2.810 Drill Press 1 P3.6.15 2.810 P6.000 Pipe 3inc.1 Specification of the Project.

16 2. the body of the project which is the drill press we put a screw and connect it to the base. As part of the improvement. series of testing were conducted by the group. Improvement of prototype The first machine that we have created does not have wheels and change the locking system. improvement and re-testing. the proponents make the base of the project by the use of angle bar. Second. Procedures include the following:     First. C.6. Each member was asked to share his views about the design and finally agreed with the common design. development of the prototype followed.6. and the like. 2.5 Financial aspect of the project which describes the overall financial viability. Initial presentation to the technical panellists was undertaken which severed as basis for the improvement of the projects. to wit: 1st Design. Said design was presented to the technical adviser for critiquing. the proponents put the main part which is the 3universal jaw chuck.6 Work plan of the project which includes a brief description in chronological order. Third. 2. D. we put wheels and added the new locking system. the final product was developed as shown below: Schedule of major activities are hereby presented in Gantt chart form. profit and loss.4 Marketing aspect of the project which describes the target market. each activity will be undertaken. Development. projected sales. Fabrication of prototype After the approval of the final design. the group brainstormed on the design to be used for the project. the proponents make the pipe and by its angle. overhead expenses. E. Testing of the Machine . Testing After the fabrication of the prototype. supply and demand analysis. and. B. Final Product Development After all the testing.6. Lastly. A. project cost. Designing Phase First.

Results are presented sequentially based on the order of the stated objectives of the study. It indicates the proposed dates when the project will be done. Activities Designing of the Improved Device as suggested by the Experts Development/Fabrication of the Final Device Pre-Test/Post-Test Market Study Final Presentation June July August September CHAPTER III RESULTS AND DISCUSSION This chapter presents the scholarly discussion of the results of the study. It .17 Activity NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR Project Planning Data Gathering Canvas of Materials Project Making Preliminar y Testing Finalizatio n The Gantt Chart II This chart represents the activities to be undertaken in order to finish the final prototype.

Testing results led to the fabrication of the final machine. The Development of a Rotator Type Pipe Holder: The first component of the study is the design and development of the Rotator Type Pipe Holder. analysis and the interpretation of information and data gathered from the survey conducted to 50 selected practitioners. tabular and textual presentations. The original design of the machine does not have wheels and change the locking system.18 includes detailed presentation of the completed machine or project as well as the result. The final product is shown below: TOP VIEW FRONT VIEW . The result is presented using the technical drawings or picture of the machine. The project was developed following the step by step processes such as designing and fabrication of the prototype. A. series of testing were undertaken to determine the efficiency of the proposed machine. teachers and students of welding technology using purposive sampling method to determine the marketability and usability of the developed product. we put wheels and added the new locking system. As part of the improvement. After which.

The Market Study .19 LEFT SIDE VIEW RIGHT SIDE VIEW B.

98 35. What would make you more likely to use our new product? 8. What changes would most improve our new product? 3. are you satisfied with your experience using our new product? Table 1: What do you like most about our new product? ITEMS Works Faster Much safe to use More durable Total RESPONSES 49 46 34 129 % 37.36 100 RANK 1 2 3 Table 1 shows that the liked most feature of the new product answered by the respondents is the item “works faster” which got the highest with 37. If our new product is available today. If you are not likely to use our product. How important is price to you when choosing this type of product? 6. Why not? 7. What changes would most improve competing products currently available in the market? 5. Table 2: What changes would most improve our new product? ITEMS Improve the design Lower price Use light materials Total RESPONSES 41 32 17 90 % 45. Overall. What do you like most about our new product? 2.66 26. It only means that the potential buyers of the product put more importance on the efficiency above all other features of the product.98% while “more durable” got the lowest rank with only 26.56 35.36%. A survey instrument was developed and administered to 50 respondents selected thru purposive sampling method which focused on the following questions: 1. How likely is that you would recommend our new product to a friend or colleague? 10.56 18.20 The second component of the study is the analysis on the marketability and usability of the machine. What do you like about competing products currently available in the market? (If applicable) 4. how likely would you be to use it instead of competing in the market? 9.88 100 RANK 1 2 3 .

“improve the design” got the highest rank with 45.88% of the respondents choose “use light materials” with the lowest rank. On the other hand.90 46. It can be deduced that potential buyers put more emphasis on the safety of the products that they purchase in the market. Table 3: What do you like about competing products currently available from other companies? ITEMS Larger Cheaper Heavier Total RESPONSES 32 23 17 72 % 44. This means that respondents prefer large yet cheap products.94 23. respectively.95 on the other hand 17. . Table 4: What changes would most improve competing products currently available from other companies? ITEMS Make it hydraulic Make it safe Reduce price Total RESPONSES 28 36 14 78 % 35.45 31.15 17. followed by “cheaper”. Data revealed that “larger” got the 1st rank with 44.This followed by “make it hydraulic”.56%.95% of the respondents choose “reduce the price” with the lowest.61 100 RANK 1 2 3 Table 3 shows the perceptions of the respondents on what they like about competing products currently available from other companies. Based on the data gathered. It can be deduced that potential buyers gave more importance on the safety of the people who will use the product and to make it more appealing and marketable.95 100 RANK 2 1 3 Table 4 shows the perception of the respondents on what they want to improve about the safety of the competing product currently available from other companies.21 Table 2 shows the perception of the respondents on what changes would most improve the new product. “reduce price”. “heavier”.61%. with 31.15%.94% and 23. the consumers desired some satisfaction on the quality of product especially that which deviates from the traditional like hydraulic or automatic type which added high value to the product. Data revealed that “make it safe” got the 1st rank with 46.90 and 17. 18. Generally.45%. with 35. It can be deduced that potential buyers want further improvement of the current design and lowered price of the product to make it more marketable.

This only implies that respondents are already satisfied with the products currently available in the market which may possibly hinders the introduction of new related item if not manufactured competitively with the products in the market. The data indicates that the price is an important aspect being considered in choosing this type of product with 48%. why not? ITEMS Do not need a product like this Do not want a product like this Satisfied w/ competing product currently available Cannot pay for a product like this Not willing to pay for a product like this Total RESPONSES 11 5 17 % 22 10 34 RANK 3 4 1 17 0 50 34 0 100 1 5 Table 6 shows the perception of the respondents on the question. Table 7: What would make you use our new product? ITEMS RESPONSES % RANK . “moderately important”. Table 6: If you are not likely to use our product. and “slightly important” with 32%. respectively. followed by “extremely important”. The data indicates that the items “Satisfied w/ competing product currently available” and “Cannot pay for a product like this” got the highest rank with 34% each while “Do not want a product like this” got the lowest rank with 10%. why not?”. “If you are not likely to use our product.22 Table 5: How important is price to you when choosing this type of product? ITEMS Extremely important Quite important Moderately important Slightly important Not at all important Total RESPONSES 16 24 8 2 0 50 % 32 48 16 4 0 100 RANK 2 1 3 4 5 Table 5 shows the perception of the respondents on how important to them is the price when choosing a product. 16% and 4%.

16 15. Table 8: If our new product is available today. Based on the data gathered “Quite .06 100 2 1 3 Table 7 shows the responses of the respondents on “what would make you use our new product?” the item “make work faster” got the highest rank with 45.23 Easy to use Make work faster Long lasting use Total 37 42 14 93 39.06% of the respondents choose “long lasting use” with the lowest. Table 9: How would you like to recommend our new product to a friend or colleague? ITEMS Extremely like Quite like Moderately like Slightly like Not like at all Total RESPONSES 12 21 16 1 0 50 % 24 42 32 2 0 100 RANK 3 1 2 4 5 Table 9 shows the responses of the respondents on how would they like to recommend our new product to a friend or colleague.16% on the other hand 15.78 45. how would you like to use it instead of other competing products from other companies? ITEMS Extremely like Quite like Moderately like Slightly like Not like at all Total RESPONSES 15 18 16 1 0 50 % 30 36 32 2 0 100 RANK 3 1 2 4 5 Table 8 shows the responses of the respondents on how would the respondents like to use it instead of other competing products from other companies? Based on the data gathered “Quite like” got the highest rank with 36% on the other hand 0% of the respondents choose “Not like at all” with the lowest. It can be deduced that potential buyer gave more importance about the fastness of the product to make it more appealing and marketable.

Table 10: Overall. or a vertical drill that is fixed to a tabletop. It can be deduced that potential buyers gave more importance to recommend our new product to a friend or colleague to make it more appealing and marketable. carpenters. and the versatility of this tool has only increased in recent decades.24 like” got the highest rank with 42% on the other hand 0% of the respondents choose “Not like at all” with the lowest. also known as a scroll chuck. It means that the potential buyers are satisfied with our product. and. workbench. Because they most often have three jaws. narrative summary of findings. The drill has been a staple in the arsenal of woodworkers. Based on the data gathered “Quite satisfied” got the highest rank with 32% on the other hand 0% of the respondents chose “Not satisfied at all” with the lowest. interconnected via a scroll gear (scroll plate). or to the floor. uses dogs (usually called jaws). . When accuracy is key to success. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS This part presents brief and concise terms of the following: reiteration of the main problems. are you satisfied with your experience using our new product? ITEMS Extremely satisfied Quite satisfied Moderately satisfied Slightly satisfied Not satisfied at all Total RESPONSES 14 16 13 7 0 50 % 28 32 26 14 0 100 RANK 2 1 3 4 5 Table 10 shows the responses of the respondents if they are satisfied with their experience using our new product. SUMMARY A self-centering chuck. professionals will turn to a drill press. and machinists for many years. method. CHAPTER IV SUMMARY OF FINDINGS. and it is more appealing and marketable. to hold onto a tool or work piece. specific problems. the term three-jaw chuck without other qualification is understood by machinists to mean a self-centering three-jaw chuck.

This prompted the proponents to develop a smaller and cheaper yet efficient machine called Rotator Type Pipe Holder. These machines.3 Practicality. On the question. the study sought answers to the following questions: 1. What are the recommendations for further improvement of the machine? The study was approached in a mixed experimental and descriptive manner and utilized questionnaires that the respondents in this study answered.56%. This study aimed to develop a Rotator Type Pipe Holder that can be used to easily center the iron to further facilitate the work and make good quality product. Specifically. slurries.98% while “more durable” got the lowest rank with only 26. “What changes would most improve our new product” it can be noted that the item “improve the design” got the highest rank with 45. however. the researchers were able to explore an existing technology and incorporate new features to it and evaluate whether the added feature really helped and improved what the technology is primarily intended to. What is the process to be used in developing the Rotator Type Pipe Holder? 2. 2. hollow pipe is far stiffer per unit weight than solid members.88% of the respondents chose “use light materials” with the lowest rank. 3. On the other hand.2 Efficiency. With this mixed method. masses of small solids. are too costly which are not affordable to ordinary citizens particularly those who are engaged in welding works. used mainly to convey substances which can flow — liquids and gases (fluids). Respondents were practitioners from various machine shops.25 A PIPE is a tubular section or hollow cylinder. Concerning the question “What do you like most about our new product?” data revealed that the item “works faster” got the highest with 37.36%.4 Cost? 3. It can also be used for structural applications. thus. usually but not necessarily of circular cross-section. Summary of finding are as follows: 1.1 Design. A total of fifty (50) served respondents of the study selected through purposive sampling. 18. and 2. 2. How will the Rotator Type Pipe Holder be described in terms of : 2. the degree of acceptance of the possible end users on the developed product is evaluated. Regarding the question. “What do you like about competing products currently available from other companies?” data revealed that “larger” got the 1st rank with . powders. 2. instructors and selected students on technical schools who were directly involved in the mechanical technology programs or operation.

Concerning the question “How important is price to you when choosing this type of product?” the data indicates that the price is “quite important” as an aspect being considered in choosing this type of product with 48%. 5. . “If you are not likely to use our product. With regards to the question “If our new product is available today. Conclusions: 1. “reduce price”.90 and 17.95% of the respondents choose “reduce the price” with the lowest. It only means that the potential buyers of the product put more importance on the efficiency above all other features of the product.15%. with 35. with 31. 6. 8. It can be deduced that potential buyers want further improvement of the current design and lower price of the product to make it more marketable. respectively. About the question. Table 10 shows the responses of the respondents if they are satisfied with their experience using our new product. “heavier”. 10. why not? The data indicates that the items “Satisfied w/ competing product currently available” and “Cannot pay for a product like this” got the highest rank with 34% each while “Do not want a product like this” got the lowest rank with 10%.This followed by “make it hydraulic”.06% of the respondents choose “long lasting use” with the lowest. “What changes would most improve competing product currently available from other companies?” data revealed that “make it safe” got the 1st rank with 46. 9. As regard to the question. 7. “moderately important”. followed by “extremely important”. Table 9 that corresponds to the question.45%. Concerning the question “What would make you more likely to use our new product?” based on the data gathered “make work faster” got the highest rank with 45.26 4. followed by “cheaper”. 16% and 4%. “How would you like to recommend our new product to a friend or colleague?” it was revealed that the item “Quite like” 42% and the least is “Not like at all” 0%. 3. and “slightly important” with 32%.94% and 23.61%. 44. respectively. Based on the data gathered “Quite like” got the highest rank with 32% on the other hand 0% of the respondents choose “Not like at all” with the lowest.16% on the other hand 15.95 on the other hand 17. how would you like to use it instead of other competing products from other companies?” it is revealed that the item “Quietly like” 36% and the least is “Not at like at all with 0%. 2. It can be concluded based on the data gathered that respondents prefer large yet cheap products.

there is a need to improve the design and make the price in accordance to its quality and materials used. acceptability of the new product was evident with the respondents’ claim that it is “safe to use” and “portable”. It means that the potential buyer like our product.  Further study is recommended to determine critical features that will increase efficiency of the product.  The new product is easy to use. 6.  Generally.27 4. safety feature can still be improved to prevent minor accident to happen. This only implies that respondents are already satisfied with the products currently available in the market which may possibly hinders the introduction of new related item if not manufactured competitively with the products in the market. the following are recommended:  To further improve the quality of the product to make it more marketable. . however. It can be deduced that potential buyers pay more importance on the fastness of the product to make it more appealing and marketable. 7. It can be deduced that potential buyer gave more importance on the safety of the people who will use the product and to make it more appealing and marketable. 9. 8. It can be deduced that potential buyer gave more importance to recommend our new product to a friend or colleague to make it more appealing and marketable. It can be construed from the data that the practicality of buyers pertains to the pricing of product as a key element in deciding whether to buy or not. 5. CONCLUSION: Based on the findings of the study. RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the findings and conclusions drawn. It means that the potential buyers are satisfied with our product.  To consider reducing cost of the project to make it more affordable to the end users. and. 10. and it is more appealing and marketable. the following conclusions were drawn:  To make the new product acceptable in the market.

Retrieved from http://en.com website.28 REFERENCES Cavallari. Porter. 2011. Toronto Star. 2011. Robles.org/wiki/Pipe_(fluid_conveyance).htm. “What is a Drill Press?” Retrieved from http://www. Tool and Manufacturing Engineers Handbook. 23‐16. W. . Society of Manufacturing Engineers.wisegeek. 26. Catherine. Daniel (2012).wikipedia. Jan. Porter: Gravy Train Cuts Mean More Lead In Our Water.com/what-is-a-drill-press. Cubberly. GSG Group Inc.wikipedia. Retrieved from TheStar. (1989). PE. ISBN 978-0-87263-351-3. Retrieved from http://en.. "Potable Water Pipe Condition Assessment For a High Rise Condominium in The Pacific Northwest". Community Engineering Services.org/wiki/Chuck_(engineering). p. Dan (2014). January 26.

“Drill Press”. Encyclopedia Britannica.org/wiki/Chuck_(engineering). Gregory (Feb–Mar 2011). Retrieved from http://global. MI.29 Whitney.britannica. USA: Village Press Inc) 24 (1): 11–15. . "How to make an inexpensive "exact adjust" 5C collet chuck". Machinist's Workshop (Traverse City.wikipedia. Retrieved from http://en.com/EBchecked/topic/171629/drill-press.