Project 2.1.

5 Redesign a Protective Case Design Brief

PLTW Engineering

Redesign a Protective Case Design Brief

Client Earbud manufacturer

Target Earbud customer

Consumer

Designer(s) Emma Filipovits, Josiah Lieb

Problem What is the problem? The current design of the earbud protective case is
Statement susceptible to damage to the 3D-printed hinge.
Who has the problem? Earbud customers.
Where is the problem happening? All markets across the world report similar
issues with the hinge.
When is the problem happening? After repeated opening and closing of the case.
Why is the problem important? The problem has impacted customer satisfaction
resulting in damage to the brand.
Design Create a preliminary design of a protective earbud case with 2 components
Statement connected by a hinge that uses less than 5 cubic inches of material and takes less
than 2 hours to print as well as meets all criteria.
Criteria 1. The new case must be composed of three components: a top, a bottom, and a
metal pin (specified by teacher).
2. The design must allow easy insertion of the ear buds into the case such that it
requires an average user seven seconds or less to secure the ear buds in the
case.
3. The case must securely store and protect the earbuds from damage and not
break or open when carried in a pants pocket or carried loosely in a purse or
bag.
4. The design will include vent holes to allow air circulation into the case but not
allow any part of the earbud(s) to protrude through the hole(s).
5. The design should be noticeably different (visually) than the existing protective
case and increase the aesthetic appeal of the product.
6. The case must fit in the pouch of the computer bag.
Constraints 1. A design must be submitted for critical review by the due date.
2. A 3D printed prototype must be submitted by the due date..
3. Due to limitations in production,
• The maximum volume of prototyping material is 5 cubic inches.
• The maximum print time is 2 hours

Page 1
© 2020 Project Lead The Way, Inc.
 He

Deliverables Phase I – Proof of Concept Only

• Initial conceptual sketches – at least three
• An accurate assembly model of the case
• A set of working drawings to include:
o An annotated Multiview drawing for each component of the
preliminary redesign including tolerances for all dimensions
o An annotated assembly drawing of the design
• A 3D-printed prototype of the design
• Documentation of total material volume and print time for prototype
• Proof of Concept Statement
• Project Reflection

Page 2
© 2020 Project Lead The Way, Inc.
 He

Project Grading Criteria:

Project (100 pts): Yes Kind of… No

1. Are all established project criteria met? 20 10 0

2. Are all established project constraints met? 20 10 0
3. Are all deliverables submitted by the deadline? 20 10 0
4. Is the product design appropriate? – Will the target client(s), 20 10 0
consumer(s), and/or user(s) approve? (Is it creative/original…?)
5. Is the presentation/project completed with the utmost 20 10 0
attention paid to overall organization, understanding and professionalism/craftsmanship?
Total = 98 /100%
Final Score = Advanced, Proficient, Average, Needs Improvement, or Incomplete??? Why?

Justify your teams final score here:

● I believe that we deserve a 98/100 because our design met all of the criteria as well as the
constraints. We turned our project in on time as well as printed our design before the due date.
Our design is appropriate and will target students from all different places. Our earbuds case is
small enough to fit inside of a computer case pouch and also has a spot to print the customers
name of the lid of the case. This will help ensure to not get their earbud case mixed up with
someone else’s. The presentation and the design were created with the most amount of effort
from both Josiah and I. We put many hours into the design to make it to the best of our abilities.

Presentation (100 pts): Advanced Proficient Average Basic Incomplete

1. Define the Problem 10 9 8 6.5 0

a. Completed Design Brief with added design
statement and criteria
2. Generate Concepts 10 9 8 6.5 0
a. Concept sketches (three minimum)
b. Justification for solution path
3. Develop Solution 30 25 20 10 0
a. Annotated concept sketch with tolerances
b. 3D solid models of two components
c. Assembly drawings
d. Complete set of working drawings
4. Construct and Test 30 25 20 10 0
a. 3D printed or alternate physical prototype
b. Proof that prototype works...
5. Evaluate Solution 20 18 16 13 0
a. Proof of concept statement
6. Completed Team Project Reflection Questions 10 9 8 6.5 0
& Graded Project Rubric w/ Justification

Page 3
© 2020 Project Lead The Way, Inc.
 He

Total = 98 /100%
Final Score = Advanced, Proficient, Average, Needs Improvement, or Incomplete??? Why?

Justify your teams final score here:

● We gave our presentation a 98/100 because it holds all of the necessary information for
the project. We did our best to make the presentation flow easily to tell the story of how
we created our design. We made it as professional as possible. We put a great amount of
effort into the presentation.

Project Team Reflection:

As a team, reflect and answer the following prompts:
1. Review the goals you recorded in Step 2 above. Did you achieve your goals? Why or why not?
○ I think we did achieve our goals that we recorded in step 2. This is because we wanted
to change several things like making the walls of the design thinner, changing the snap
fit so it actually worked, and changing how the hinge was so then it would easily work.
So as we went along the project we changed these things and we successfully did them.

2. Compare this design experience to Project 1.3.7. Was this design process more efficient?
Support your assessment with examples. What did you learn in this design experience that can
help you improve your design efficiency in the future?
○ This design process was definitely more efficient than 1.3.7 because first when we were
making changes to the hinges it didn't take as long to do than the first time. Also it was
the same thing with the snap fit and it was easier to create it. What I learned in this
design experience was that if you make sure everything looks right the first time you do
it then you don’t have to barely make any changes.

3. A design process is meant to be iterative (Links to an external site.). Explain how you used
iteration to improve your design of a protective container.
○ The process of trial and error goes hand in hand with iteration. We used iteration to improve our
design when we evaluated our current solution and saw where the changes needed to be made
and then made those changes. Since in conclusion, we made a solution and then made changes
to the errors and repeated this process until our favoured outcome.

Page 4
© 2020 Project Lead The Way, Inc.