1  

Blind-Assist Labeling Template

Team 3 - A Better Way

Kevin Hackett Darren Quelette

Ryan Risdon Steven Rogers

Dominic Rosselli Robert Sampson Joseph Schultheis

Friday, November 21st, 2008 Abstract This report covers the design process of a template used to aid in positioning and placing labels on mail for a bulk mailing operation. The objective is to make this template easily adjustable so that a blind mailroom employee can label different kinds of mail efficiently. By using this template the mailroom employee, would become more proficient at setting up the workspace and thus become more productive.   

2  

Table of Contents

1. Introduction 3

2. Customer Needs Assessment and Revised Needs Statement 4

3. Benchmarking, Standards, and Target Specifications 8

4. Concept Generation 15

5. Concept Screening and Evaluation 35

References 37

3  

1. Introduction 1.1 SW Resources

The company was founded in 1964 by the Association of Retarded Children and the Junior League of Parkersburg, West Virginia. There are five divisions of SW Resources which include: SW Graphics, Mail Plus, Cardability, SW Industries, and Blennerhassett Rehabilitation Center. The company’s mission statement is “to provide vocational services, employment and other opportunities for individuals who have disabilities enabling them to achieve their full potential” (SW Resources, 2008).

The Mail Plus division provides billing, mailing, and direct imprinting services. They specialize in first class and bulk presort services, inserting and folding, bar coding, collating, dot tabbing, data entry, bulk packaging, mail merge, and binding. They currently process over one million pieces of mail annually (SW Resources, 2008). 1.2 Disabilities A person who is disabled is defined by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) as “…a person who has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities, a person who has a history or record of such an impairment, or a person who is perceived by others as having such an impairment” (ADA, 2002). The individual who the team is working with is named Bob, and he works in the Mail Plus division of SW Resources. He labels catalogs, magazines, and other various pieces of mail, and because he is blind, he uses a special template which aids him in positioning and placing labels. The template was originally made without his input, and even though the template is functional, improvements can be made. 1.3 Project 1.3.1 Current Template The current template is made by taking a flat, square piece of wood and fixing two thin pieces to the edges. The pieces are positioned so that they meet at a right angle on the bottom left corner of the wood square. A specifically sized piece of cardboard is then attached with tape to the bottom of the template. When Bob needs to label a different item, such as when moving from a magazine-sized to a letter-sized piece of mail, he uses a different piece of cardboard to adjust the size. 1.3.2 Current Standards Though there are no explicit standards for machinery used by the blind, however there are rules governing the working environment of the generalized handicapped person. These are specifically outlined in the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA, 2002). The template that the team would design would be labeled under Assistive Technology. The definition of Assistive Technology is explicitly defined as “…any item, piece of equipment, or product system, whether acquired commercially, modified, or customized, that is used to increase,

4  

maintain, or improve functional capabilities of individuals with disabilities.” (Assistive Technology, 2008) 1.4 Needs Statement The purpose of the project is to design a template that will address some of the difficulties Bob has outlined. This means making the template easier to adjust in order to accommodate different types of mail. The design will allow Bob to become more productive and enable other blind peoples to label mail in an easier manner. 2. Customer Needs Assessment and Revised Needs Statement The FOCUS process is used to assess the needs of our customer. FOCUS is an acronym for Frame the Project, Organized Resources, Collect Data, Understand the Voices, Select Action. By using this iterative process the customer is fully integrated with the decision process. Within SW Resources, several customer points of view were identified. Our contact via email and phone for the project is the communications customer voice. With this individual we discussed when to set up meetings, interviews, and observations of the other employees. Managerial employees at SW Resources were identified as a source of information about the abilities of the workers and the availability and priorities of various potential projects. The employees involved in the potential projects are the third voice of the customer. The employees are asked: What can be done to help you and what ideas do you have for improvement? The employees are also the object of observation as they perform their current operation. The final voice of the customer is any maintenance, janitorial, and stock room employees that would be involved in the potential project. These people are asked: How can our design make maintenance and repairs easy for you? What parts, hardware, and tools should we use that you have in stock or have access to? By utilizing all employees that may be involved in the project at some time, a larger perspective and diverse set of needs and specifications are achieved. The interview and observation guide used to identify the customer’s needs is given below. Interview and observation guide:

1) With managers, create list of areas to observe 2) Observe the entire process, noting excessive movements/steps/hesitations. 3) Observe problem areas in which:

a) A workers’ handicap affects their performance b) The current process is ineffective

4) As a team, select project, and go back to make in-depth observations and interviews with workers.

In enacting this guide, three items were deemed necessary in order to get accurate and useful information. First, conduct interviews in small groups of two or three. Second, conduct observations with permission. Third, take notes, pictures, and videos to record observations. Fourth, compile information, do time studies, and identify problem areas. These steps are

5  

repeated in iteration until the customer’s needs are completely identified. Based on this interaction, a set of needs was identified in order to execute a fully successful project. The list of needs represents the customers and teams goals that are to be used to produce a revised, mutually agreeable needs statement. Figure 2.0.1 shows the needs that are to be addressed.

# Need 1 The jig is durable 2 The jig is lightweight 3 The jig is adjustable 4 The jig will fit a variety of template shapes 5 The jig is ergonomic 6 The jig poses no danger to the user 7 The jig has easily replaceable components 8 The jig will last a long time 9 The jig is easily maintained 10 The jig is cheap

Figure 2.0.1: Customer Needs and Team Goals

2.1 Evaluation / Weighting of Customer Needs

To fully assess the success of each design concept, a set of criteria must be applied to each design, and those criteria in turn must be effectively weighted. Because each evaluation criteria varies in importance for the final design, the weighting will serve as a means to differentiate between the importance of each criterion. For concept assessment, more weight will be given to the more important criteria and less weight to the less important criteria. This is needed because, for example, customer maintenance is not as important as safety. From the original list of needs, the needs were divided into groups that generalized the need that they were assessing. Figure 2.1.1 below shows how this division occurred.

1. Usable 1.1 The jig is safe 1.2 The jig is lightweight 1.3 The jig is ergonomic 2. Durable 2.1 The jig has high durability 2.2 The jig will last a long time 2.3 The jig is easily maintained 3. Adjustable 3.1 The jig is adjustable in quarter inch increments 3.2 The jig will fit a variety of template shapes 4. Customer Maintenance 4.1 The jig is cheap

6  

4.2 The jig has easily replaceable components

Figure 2.1.1: Division of Needs

Based on conversations with the customer and the group’s general engineering knowledge, these needs were weighted as shown in the following table in Figure 2.1.2.

Usable Adjustable Durable Customer Maintenance Total Weighting

Usable 1.00 0.50 2.00 3.00 6.50 0.30 Adjustable 2.00 1.00 3.00 2.00 8.00 0.37 Durable 0.50 0.33 1.00 3.00 4.83 0.22 Customer Maintenance 0.33 0.50 0.33 1.00 2.17 0.10

Figure 2.1.2: Needs Weighting

The revised needs table accounting for these weightings is shown in Figure 2.1.3: 1. Usable (0.30) 1.1 The jig is safe 1.2 The jig is lightweight 1.3 The jig is ergonomic 2. Durable (0.22) 2.1 The jig has high durability 2.2 The jig will last a long time 2.3 The jig is easily maintained 3. Adjustable (0.37) 3.1 The jig is adjustable in quarter inch increments 3.2 The jig will fit a variety of template shapes 4. Customer Maintenance (0.10) 4.1 The jig is cheap 4.2 The jig has easily replaceable components

Figure 2.1.3: Revised Needs Division

This further assessment allowed the team to apply a rating to each individual need. This rating between 1 and 5 was used in our concept analysis and feasibility meeting to differentiate the design criteria. Figure 2.1.4 shows the results of this differentiation. The rating is known as an importance factor for each of the needs. A rating of 5 indicates that the need is very high in importance, and a rating of 1 indicates that the need listed is not important to the project.

7  

# Need Imp 1 The jig is durable 4 2 The jig is lightweight 3 3 The jig is adjustable 5 4 The jig will fit a variety of template shapes 4 5 The jig is ergonomic 3 6 The jig poses no danger to the user 3 7 The jig has easily replaceable components 2 8 The jig will last a long time 3 9 The jig is easily maintained 4 10 The jig is cheap 2

Figure 2.1.4: Importance Factors of Needs

2.2 Revised Needs Statement The customer’s need is to create a more efficient workspace for a blind mailroom employee by creating a device that improves setup and provides adjustable labeling and packaging.

8  

3. Benchmarking, Standards, and Target Specifications 3.1 Benchmarking 3.1.1 Label Peeler A non-electric label peeler is modeled off of the design by Weber, in which the user pulls the paper that the labels are on over a sharp edge. Because of the abrupt change in direction of the paper, the label is peeled off. The current design incorporates an electronic push button that advances the paper a specified distance. The Weber design is shown below in Figure 3.1.1.1.

Figure 3.1.1.1: Weber label peeler (Originals by Weber, 2008) There are other label peelers that are in use that range from complex to simple. One of the simpler ways to peel the label is to use a hand held plastic device as shown below in Figure 3.1.1.2:

9  

Figure 3.1.1.2: Label peeler from Garvey (Garvey, 2008)

However, the problem with this solution is that the customer is blind and it would be troublesome for him to keep track of a small plastic peeler. Other more advanced peelers are in production like one made by Avery, shown in Figure 3.1.1.3:

Figure 3.1.1.3: Avery label peeler (Avery, 2008)

Unfortunately, this model is roughly $200, and it only works with Avery label products. Also, since the there are moving parts, there is a greater chance that injury could occur. These cost and safety issues affect the usefulness of this product to the design.

10  

There are several automatic label peelers combined with a label applicator. These usually employ tamping or compressed gas to remove the label and apply it firmly to the object (Allen, 1997). One that incorporates some of these features is shown below in Figure 3.1.1.4:

Figure 3.1.1.4 Allen labeling machine (Allen, 1997) The problem with this kind of machine is that it is complicated and is probably out of the team’s capabilities to produce. Also if it did not replace Bob’s job, it would not be as safe to use as his current jig. From the picture it is obvious that there are many pinch points and safety hazards especially for a blind employee. 3.1.2 Rubber Band Applicator The rubber band applicator works by providing a location for the magazines to placed in order to ease the placement of a rubber band around a complete stack of labeled mail. The rubber bands are stored on the curved section of the applicator shown below in Figure 3.1.2.1. When the user

11  

has the desired amount of mail in the holder, the user moves a rubber band from the holding area to the pile of mail.

Figure 3.1.2.1: Rubber band applicator

Similar designs are in production. These include one from Assistive Technology solutions as shown below in Figure 3.1.2.2:

Figure 3.1.2.2: Assistive Technology Rubber Band Applicator (2008)

12  

The applicator is currently designed to apply rubber bands to legal size documents but can be modified to accommodate other sizes. 3.2 Standards The method for determining the possible applicable standards included examining the entire labeling process that Bob needs to go through in order to label the mail. Next we determined the appropriate equipment that was needed to label the mail. From this, we determined our search criteria for possibly applicable standards. The main search criteria were standards for machinery in use by blind employees. More specifically we were looking for any information about pinch points, sharpness of edges, materials, etc. After searching through major legislation like the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1994 and the Assistive Technology Act of 1998, there were not any specific requirements for the search criteria mentioned above. Most of the information involved building codes and requirements for hiring people with disabilities. However, there were some requirements from the sources that should be taken into consideration when designing the workspace. Section 4.2.5 of the ADA deals with the forward reach requirement for people in wheel chairs and states:

“If the clear floor space only allows forward approach to an object, the maximum high forward reach allowed shall be 48 in (1220 mm) (see Fig. 5(a)). The minimum low forward reach is 15 in (380 mm). If the high forward reach is over an obstruction, reach and clearances shall be as shown in Fig. 5(b).”

(See Figure 3.2.1) The reason this applies is that since Bob is a blind employee his work area needs to be as efficient as possible so that he does not lose any items he might need for his labeling job. This means that any item that the team designs would need to meet these requirements and must lie within hand reach. After extensive benchmarking and searching with the aid of an engineering librarian, no applicable standards were found in relation to blind usage of a labeling template. Standards will apply for the project however. There are applicable ASME standards related to various aspects of the project. Foreseeable applicable ASME standards include standards for GD&T, engineering drawings, metal products, screw threads, surface quality, limits and fits, fasteners and possibly others. The application of these standards will be applied when it comes time for their related activities. The lack of a complete concept design however prevents the team from specifically applying these standards.

13  

Figure 3.2.1: ADA Figure 5 – Maximum Forward Reach over an Obstruction (ADA, 2002)

14  

3.3 Target Specifications, Constraints, and Design Criteria 3.3.1 Target Specifications The specifications for the jig need to meet certain criteria. These target specifications are a combination of specifications requested by the customer and team determined requirements. After meeting with the customer and discussing a list of criteria that the jig must accomplish, a list of target specifications was complied. The complete list of target specifications can be seen in Figure 3.3.1.

Jig Value Units Size <16 Inches Stop Strip Dimensions 1 x ¼ Inches Adjustability (up and down)

0 – 4 Inches

Adjustability (left and right)

16 Inches

Increments (up, down, left, and right) ¼ Inches

Corner Stop 90 Degrees Drop Height Durability 4 Feet Expected Lifetime 5 – 10 Years Affordability < $200 USD Weight < 10 Pounds Corrosion Resistance Close

materials Galvanic Scale

Template Deflection ¼ Inches Figure 3.3.1: Target Specifications

3.3.2 Constraints The jig and any additional “delighter” features must be able to fit onto the table that the customer currently works on. A drastic increase in the space needed for the label application process can limit the productivity of the customer. Increasing the workspace can also limit the workers in his immediate work area. 3.3.3 Design Criteria Some of the target specifications that were added to the list of customer requested specifications include expected lifetime. The customer made no remarks about an expected lifetime of the jig, but this was a specification that needed addressed. The affordability of the device was also not specified by the customer, as that was a team-based decision that was determined by available budget. The weight of the jig was also not specified by the customer but included as a target specification.

15  

4. Concept Generation 4.1 Patent Searching The team found few patents for manual label applicators. However, US Patent 4369582 (Pfeffer, 1983) presented a possible way to provide adjustability for the template. The following graphics show the way in which this label applying template accomplished adjustability. Figure 4.1.1 shows how the piece slides across the template. Figure 4.1.2 shows how the piece is secured once the desired position is accomplished. Because adjustability is a top priority for the concept, this idea could be applied to accomplish this need. Not included in this adjustability idea is the ability for a user to be aware of the features position without the use of sight.

Figure 4.1.1: Thumb screw isometric view (Pfeffer, 1983)

Figure 4.1.2: Thumb screw side view. (Pfeffer, 1983)

16  

US Patent 4626313 (Karp, 1986) was another concept that was researched. This device creates a method to peel labels from a sheet of labels. This concept can be used to ease the removal of the labels from the sheet. Figure 4.1.3 shows the roller used to remove the labels from the sheet.

Figure 4.1.3: Front view of label roller. (Karp, 1986) Figure 4.1.4 shows the whole device.

Figure 4.1.4: Complete device side view. (Karp, 1986)

17  

A close up view of the actual label removing design is shown in Figure 4.1.5.

Figure 4.1.5: Label removing device side view. (Karp, 1986)

US Patent 4660885 (Suhr, 1987) is a locking mechanism that is being considered by the team for fixing the template location. This component is designed to lock a seatback into various positions using a stepwise locking mechanism. With spring force and a locking lever, the seatback can be positioned at various heights according the separation of teeth on the guide bar. This motion can be done with one hand due to the lever being pivotally mounted. The design would help in positioning the labeling template and locking it quickly.

18  

Figure 4.1.6: Isometric view of lever and guide in spring loaded compression. (Suhr, 1987)

US Patent 4221430 is a “low cost, highly convenient, and non-complicated push button adjuster (Frobose, 1980).” A spring loaded push button is used to shift a connected locking pin out of a detent slot in the support bar. The adjustable part is free to move until the button is released and relocked into a different position. A locking mechanism such as this would be extremely beneficial to the team’s design. It would be easy to create and simple to use. Eliminating the use of a thumb screw will decrease setup time and the amount of wear the mechanism will undergo.

19  

Figures 4.1.7 and 4.1.8: Side and Back view. (Frobose, 1980)

A different approach to the labeling process involved an automatic feed of the pieces of mail to reduce the motion of the customer to take each individual piece of mail and insert it into the labeling template. This idea was based off of the Adjustable Self-Leveling Plate Dispenser (House, 1976), US Patent 3937361. This design, shown below in Figures 4.1.9 and 4.1.10, could be modified to allow mail to be stacked inside of a housing, and as each piece is removed the whole stack would rise to the top until every piece has been labeled.

20  

Figure 4.1.9: Outside Isometric and Top Views of Patent 3937361 (House, 1976)

21  

Figure 4.1.10: Cross-Sectional Side Views of Patent 3937361 (House, 1976)

4.2 Concept Generation In generating possible concepts, the group held a meeting to have a brainstorming session. There were no notes; it was a very informal meeting. Members spoke at will to generate individual ideas in response to the problem and target specs at hand. The purpose of this meeting was simply to get the creative ball rolling, and so afterwards there was a cluster of different small ideas in the group. The next step was about a week later when another meeting was held. The group met in the design room in Stocker so ideas and concepts could be written on the dry erase boards. Each member was instructed to come to the meeting prepared with one or two concepts which were developed by the group of ideas already presented in the first meeting, as well as using new breakthroughs and thoughts found individually in the previous week.

22  

At the meeting, each member drew their concept sketch on one of the dry erase boards. Once all the concepts were up, each design was given a number, and one by one the creating group member described in detail the parts, problems, and operation of their concept. The next step included feedback, advice, and more brainstorming from the entire team directed at each concept. Once the new ideas were applied, and simplifications were considered and implemented, the group looked to combine any concepts that had similar ideas and functions, but that had their own flaws which could be solved by an idea applied in another concept. The main functions that needed to be provided in all concepts can be categorized into a means of securing and a means of adjusting incrementally. Figure 4.2.0 below briefly shows the means for each function that were considered. There are many more ideas for adjustability than security because of its much larger impact on the overall design of the labeling jig.

Means Function

Adjustability Security

1 Rack and Pinion Thumb Screws

2 Grooves with Roller Wing nuts

3 Screw Feature (Y-direction only) Peg Hole

4 T-slot or similar Rail Sliders

5 Graduated Spiral Notebook (Y-Direction only)

6 Pegs and Peg Holes

7 Threaded Rod

8 Crank Figure 4.2.0: Morphological Chart

4.2.1: Concept 1 The first conceptual design developed is shown in Figure 4.2.1.1 below. It consists of an 18” by 12” flat backing to which two stainless steel bars are attached on the left and bottom to form a 90° angle in the bottom left corner of the workspace for the customer to use as a square point of reference. Stainless steel was chosen as the material because it will be handled often and needs to be corrosion resistant. The bottom bar has evenly spaced grooves ¼” apart from trough to trough for a roller on the vertical bar to set the horizontal position of the jig. A cutaway side view of these grooves is shown in the sketch. The depth of each groove would have to be calculated to support ease of movement and rigidity for use. The roller is attached by a spring to the vertical bar and will click each time it lowers into the groove. Below the grooved bottom bar is a second bar with a T-slot to support the rigidity of the vertical bar when it is being pressed down by the user. The vertical bar supports a horizontal bar in a similar way with grooves and a roller attached to the horizontal bar. There is also a T-slot in the side of the vertical bar to support

23  

rigidity of the horizontal bar. It is located on the side to increase the workspace size. A cutaway side view of the vertical bar is also shown in the sketch. There is a ¼” clearance between this bar and the backing, and the horizontal bar and the backing to allow space to slide mail under the bars. The horizontal bar attached to the vertical bar supports the plastic template used to locate the labeling position on each parcel that is squared in the bottom left corner. Plastic was chosen as a material because it is flexible and will bend down to the backing elastically. It is connected to the horizontal bar with four standard screws.

Figure 4.2.1.1: Conceptual Design #1

This design meets all of the customer requirements: (1) it is square, durable and has raised edges, (2) it has a slide able and extendable position marker that can be locked in place, and (3) the position marker can be placed in many positions to account for different mail sizes. All of the bars are stainless steel, so they meet the strength requirement. The design is such that sufficient rigidity will accompany the setup. It is very flexible in locating a position anywhere on the workspace. One important advantage of this design is that there is a passive locking system with the grooves that will maintain the set position without additional steps to lock it down, and this will save time for the operator. 4.2.2: Concept 2 Concept 2 involved a gear train to adjust the labeling template on a similar backing to Concept 1. This concept never really got off of the ground; however, it was accompanied by two ideas for “delighter” features that will be covered in Section 4.2.11.

24  

4.2.3: Concept 3 This concept is based upon a square board made of a sturdy and durable material that measures 16 inches by 16 inches. There will be a 1 inch wide raised area around the bottom and left side of the device. This will leave a recessed area that will be 15 inches by 15 inches to allow the mail or catalog to be lower than the securing device. This can be seen in Figure 4.2.3.1.

Figure 4.2.3.1: Top view of Concept 3

There will be a plate that will rest on the 1 inch raised strip that can be locked in place with thumbscrews or wing nuts. This locking plate can be seen with better detail in Figure 4.2.3.2.

Figure 4.2.3.2: Side view of Concept 3

The remaining dimensions of the device have yet to be determined based on material selection and ease of manufacturing. The template device used to position labels will resemble a “spiral notebook.” It will have several “sheets” each varying in length from 1 inch to 4 inches in increments of ¼ inch. This can be seen in Figure 4.2.3.3.

25  

Figure 4.2.3.3: Spiral notebook template concept

The spiral notebook template system will be held in place by the locking plate on the labeling device. The desired length can be selected and placed into the device and then locked down. The remaining unused template lengths will hang off the bottom of the device out of the way of the user. The templates will be made of a thin and flexible plastic that is durable to allow for a long lifetime. This concept was chosen as a feasible candidate for prototyping. 4.2.4: Concept 4 This concept is also based upon a square board made of a sturdy and durable material that measures 16 inches by 16 inches. There will be a 1.45 inch wide raised area around the bottom and left side of the device. This raised area will provide a perfectly square corner in which to put the mail or catalogue. The raised area will have 0.40 diameter holes spaced ½ inch apart. This can be seen in Figure 4.2.4.1.

Figure 4.2.4.1: Top view of Concept 4

The holes will be recessed to a depth of 1 inch to allow the template holder to be positioned along the raised area. This can be seen in Figure 4.2.4.2.

26  

Figure 4.2.4.2: Side view of Concept 4

The template device used to position labels will resemble a “spiral notebook.” It will have several “sheets” each varying in length from 1 inch to 4 inches in increments of ¼ inch. This can be seen in Figure 4.2.4.3.

Figure 4.2.4.3: Spiral notebook template concept

The spiral notebook template system will be held in place by the locking plate on the template holder. The desired length can be selected and placed into the holder and then locked down. The remaining unused template lengths will hang off the bottom of the holder out of the way of the user. The templates will be made of a thin and flexible plastic that is durable enough to allow for a long lifetime. The template holder will be made out of a similar material as the rest of the device. It will be 5.9 inches long and 1 inch wide. There will be a movable top plate that can be adjusted to lock the template in place. This can be seen in Figure 4.2.4.4.

27  

Figure 4.2.4.4: Top view of template holder

The adjustable plate will be held in place with thumb screws or wing nuts. The pegs will be slightly less than the 0.4 inch diameter to fit into the recessed holes of the jig. Only the top portion of the peg will be threaded to allow the plate to be locked into place. This can be seen in Figure 4.2.4.5.

Figure 4.2.4.5: Side view of template holder

The template holder will fit into the recessed holes on the jig and can be adjusted left or right to position the template at any desired location. Figure 4.2.4.6 shows the entire assembly of the device.

Figure 4.2.4.6: Top view of complete device for Concept 4

28  

4.2.5: Concept 5 This concept is based around four rails and three linear bearings. The device is easily adjustable to cover a very large area that goes well beyond the technical specification. All rail notches are one fourth of an inch apart, allowing the user to know the location of the template by touch and by sound. The notches act as guides for the two cranks which will move the linear bearings a fourth of an inch a time. The template will need to start at any of the four corners prior to counting in order to ensure the correct distance is acquired. An important aspect of this concept is the fact that there will be no features interfering with the labeling process above the template. This will allow for the user to position the label just as he has been. One disadvantage of this idea is that the customer will have to slide the mail-piece under the rails when placing it against the bottom left corner. A schematic of this design is in Figure 4.2.5.1.

Figure 4.2.5.1: Concept 5

4.2.6: Concept 6 Concept 6 is based around two rack and pinion systems. The coverable area is just enough to satisfy the technical specification. Each pinion will have a knob which the user can turn to find the correct position. The pinion will be free sliding when the arms are unlocked. A click system will be in place to tell the user every time a fourth inch increment is reached. Once the correct dimension is met, a quick push button locking mechanism will be applied to secure the template.

29  

There will be one on each axis. In order to insure safety around the gear joints there will be finger guards installed around all pinch points. A schematic of this concept is in Figure 4.2.6.1.

Figure 4.2.6.1: Concept 6

4.2.7: Concept 7 Concept 7 uses two rack and pinion assemblies for the X-directional movement of the label placement holder, as shown in Figure 4.2.7.2, and a screw feature for the Y-directional movement, as shown in Figures 4.2.7.1 and 4.2.7.3. The following graphics show some of the detail.

Figure 4.2.7.1: Concept 7 Top View

30  

Figure 4.2.7.2: Concept 7 Bottom Side View

Figure 4.2.7.3: Detail for Label Placement Holder

The concept of this jig is to have the label placement holder sandwiched between two rack and pinion configurations. The center fixture would be marked by rack gearing on both the top and bottom and enough thickness to allow for the label placement fixture to move in the Y direction from within it. Both of the pinions are fixed in position. Figure 4.2.7.2 shows how as the label placement holder is moved away from the middle. The result is that center fixture, which is shown in the figure as a long horizontal white bar, can move up to 6 inches beyond the original 16” template. The group could attach a rotating knob to one of the pinions that would allow the user to move the center piece by adjusting one of the knobs. There a couple ways to accomplish measurement without using a ruler to find where the label placement holder is located. The first is by running the knob though gear pairs that make some distance the result of a certain amount of rotation, for example a one inch distance is achieved through one full 360° turn. Another option would be to create some sort of mechanism that makes a noise per every ¼” of measurement. The disadvantage of both of these options is that the user must rely on holding places in his head.

31  

However, the user has high mental capacity and since the largest deviation from the zero position would be six inches, it is likely that there would be little trouble with this design. Accomplishment of the Y directional movement of the label placement holder is shown in Figure 4.2.7.3. This mechanism must be offset in the negative Y direction so that the user can bring the label placement holder all the way to only ¼” from the bottom strip. A screw is used for the adjustability. The screw is fixed to a stationary piece attached to the top of the bottom strip configuration. It is attached the actual label placement holder by bolts and an unthreaded hole so that the only translated motion is in the Y direction and the label placement holder is not forced to rotate along with the screw. Measured movement of this could also be accomplished by the attachment of a gear box. The gearing would likely be lower in this case. There are some significant disadvantages to this system. It may be difficult to create a small enough mechanism to accomplish the design shown in Figure 4.2.7.3 without sacrificing integrity. Furthermore small pieces may fail more often and be harder to maintain. Also, the motion of the middle piece up to 6 inches beyond the original jig may provide a safety or space concern. Also, if the group cannot create a feasible way for the user to locate measurements using the adjustability features then this design will have failed. 4.2.8: Concept 8 Concept 8 is a simple and versatile concept that aims to achieve, and in some cases exceed, the customer requirements. This concept uses a peg and hole system to adjust the labeling template in the horizontal direction. The peg holes are incremented by ¼’’ along the entire length of the top and bottom of the base template. There is no tightening required to secure the movement in this direction. While the pegs are in the holes, it will be secure until the pegs are pulled back out of the holes. A main problem aimed to be solved is the ability for Bob to set up his device independently. In this device, all he needs to be told is where to place the label in the horizontal direction. From there, as long as he starts at the far left or far right extreme, he can feel each ¼’’ increment as the pegs slide over and past them, so he always know where he is on the template. The base template, made of a material not yet determined, is angled at 90° along two of the edges to allow for the paper object to be perfectly square to the rest of the template. The base dimensions are 16’’x 16’’.

Figure 4.2.8.1: Concept 8

32  

For adjusting in the vertical direction, the plastic bendable piece (which is indicated with the horizontal lines in Figure 4.2.8.1) is suspended between two T-slot rails. Using a wing nut or other hand fastener, the plastic piece can be secured or loosened to adjust anywhere along the T-slot rail. This concept allows for labeling across the entire 16’’x 16’’ template, which exceeds the 16’’ x 4’’ customer requirement. A possible problem with the design concept that may need to be addressed is the ease of use when applying the labels. As shown above, the labels are applied directly above the plastic piece after Bob bends the piece to the base plate. The issue may come up that Bob cannot always get the labels placed between the two sliding rails, which may be an obstruction. 4.2.9: Concept 9 A schematic of conceptual design 9 is given below in Figure 4.2.9.1. The vertical and horizontal adjustment are actuated by ACME threaded rods and nuts. Knobs are placed at the ends of the rods to allow the user to rotate the rods, and cause a linear force in the nuts. Hardened and ground shafts are placed in parallel with the threaded rods. These guide shafts provide the anti-rotation required for the ACME system to provide linear motion. Linear bearings are used to guide the template assembly on the shafts. The rods and shafts are placed very close together so that moment forces and misalignments do not jam the sliding motion along the shafts. The labels are easily placed with an unobstructed template area in this design. Also, the letter or magazine to be labeled is unrestricted on the top and right to allow easy insertion and removal of the work.

Figure 4.2.7.1: Concept 9

33  

4.2.10: Concept 10

 Figure 4.2.10.1: Concept 10

This design is based off of a plate dispenser that is used in restaurants to hold a stack of plates and automatically raise up the next plate after one is removed, US Patent 3937361 (House, 1976). A stack of mail to be labeled is placed inside of the apparatus on top a plate. The plate is supported by a spring between it and the bottom of the apparatus. The top of the rectangular system has the combined conceptual design for the labeling template. The idea behind this design is that the customer could place a large stack of mail into the machine and label the top piece, then pull out the top piece and the next would automatically rise to the top. This would eliminate the motion of picking up an individual piece of mail and inserting it into the labeling template, thus reducing the time it takes to label a single piece of mail and increasing the customer’s productivity. The problem with this design is that it would need to be adjustable for different sizes of mail. This could be problematic, because the design would have to be for the largest size mail that is to be labeled, and the stack would have to be able to be stabilized all the way down to the smallest sized mail. There would also have to be plates that go down inside of the apparatus to stabilize smaller pieces. In addition, these stabilizers would also have to permit the bottom plate to rise as mail is taken off of the top. The patent for the plate dispenser accounts for different sizes with adjustable stabilization bars that are outside of the self-rising center. Another challenge would be to find the correct spring force for the plate. In addition, this design would have to be placed on the floor and this could impede the workspace of other employees in Mail Plus.

34  

4.2.11: “Delighter” Features In addition to the customer requirements that are shaping our project and concepts, the group hopes to add some additional assistance to the performance of Bob’s job. While labeling, Bob piles up whatever mailer is being labeled beside him. Once a pile of a certain size is made, Bob has to apply rubber bands to the pile and place it in a bag. In observations, the rubber banding was an awkward and cumbersome task for him to accomplish quickly. A rubber band applicator concept was devised to ease his rubber banding task. The rubber band applicator works by providing a place for the magazines or other work piece to be placed and allowing ease of placing the rubber band. The rubber bands are stored on the curved section of the applicator shown below in Figure 4.2.11.1. When the user has the desired amount of mail in the holder, the user moves a rubber band from the holding area to the pile of mail. This concept, since not specified as a requirement from the customer, aims to increase the speed of this process as an extra perk in the group’s assistance of Bob. In developing this concept further, possible safety issues must be explored to determine the likelihood of painful rubber band snaps.

Figure 4.2.11.1: Rubber band applicator

35  

5. Concept Screening and Evaluation 5.1 Concept Screening The customer has not been reached yet for review of conceptual designs. Due to his disability (blindness), we will describe the designs to him to receive his input and show the sketches to his supervisor or another interested party that can speak to them. After the current designs have been shown to the customer we will input his feedback into our design decision. 5.2 Feasibility and Effectiveness Analysis The feasibility and effectiveness of our project is ultimately be determined by the customer’s use of the final design. Until then the feasibility and effectiveness is determined by how closely the design concepts match the customer needs and how the design compares to the current operation. The feasibility of the various designs is decided by the criteria listed below in Figure 5.2.1. A solution that cannot meet any one of these criteria is considered not viable. From the table none of the concepts are completely unworkable, but Concepts 1, 2, and 4 are the least feasible. This is also demonstrated in the feasibility ratings given in Section 5.3.

Design 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Time ~within schedule Y M Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Tools ~within lab capabilities M Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Cost ~within budget M M Y M Y Y Y Y Y Skills ~within team skills Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Feasible Yes or No M M Y M Y Y Y Y Y

Figure 5.2.1: Feasibility Criteria (Y = yes, N = no, M = maybe)

5.3 Concept Development, Scoring and Selection Prior to the meeting on 11/9/08, each team member was to sketch at least one conceptual design on his own without collaboration with anyone else on the team. Nine conceptual designs were made by the seven team members, and were presented at the meeting by the team member who thought of each design. Everyone explained what their design was and how it worked to the other team members and they asked any questions that they had about the designs for clarification. After everyone had presented his design, the team wrote down ratings on a scale of 1-5, with 5 being the highest and 1 being the lowest, for each of the designs. Each design was rated on the criteria listed in Figure 5.3.1 below, and each criterion was given an importance factor to give proper weighting to the importance of that rating. The team then shared their ratings and the average rating from the seven members was entered into a spreadsheet for each criterion and design. Figure 5.3.1 also shows the average team rating for each of the designs listed by number.

36  

Criteria Importance Factor

Team Average Rating 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Feasibility 4 3.4 3.1 4.4 2.9 3.9 4.3 3.7 4.3 3.6Ease of Use 5 3.3 3.9 3.6 3.7 4.3 3.8 3.7 3.3 3.7Simplicity 4 3.1 2.6 4.1 2.7 3.3 3.9 3.7 4 3.4Cost 2 3 2.7 4.1 3.1 2.7 3.9 3 3.7 3.4Durability 4 3.1 3.4 4 3.6 4 3.9 3.7 3.7 4Safety 5 4 3.9 4.4 4 4 4.1 3.7 4.4 3.9

Figure 5.3.1: Ratings and Criteria for Conceptual Design Selection These ratings were then multiplied by the importance factor for each criterion to give an average team score for each criterion and design. The scores are shown in Figure 5.3.2. The averages of the scores for each design across all criteria was then found, and this was divided by the sum of the importance factors so that the weighted rating would appear on the same 1-5 scale as the original ratings and the important factors would be divided out.

Criteria Importance Factor

Team Score for Concept _ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Feasibility 4 13.6 12.4 17.6 11.6 15.6 17.2 14.8 17.2 14.4Ease of Use 5 16.5 19.5 18 18.5 21.5 19 18.5 16.5 18.5Simplicity 4 12.4 10.4 16.4 10.8 13.2 15.6 14.8 16 13.6Cost 2 6 5.4 8.2 6.2 5.4 7.8 6 7.4 6.8Durability 4 12.4 13.6 16 14.4 16 15.6 14.8 14.8 16Safety 5 20 19.5 22 20 20 20.5 18.5 22 19.5

Average Score 13.5 13.5 16.4 13.6 15.3 16.0 14.6 15.7 14.8Total Points

Possible 24

Overall Rating 2.81 2.81 3.41 2.83 3.18 3.32 3.03 3.26 3.08Table 5.3.2: Conceptual Design Scores and Weighted Average Ratings

The highest rated conceptual designs were 8, 6, 3, and 5. A combination of the concepts from these designs will be the basis of the final conceptual design. The lower rated designs have not been completely ruled out and will be taken into account while conceptualizing the design of the final product. Customer feedback is necessary to reach our final conceptual design decision. We will present to him the conceptual designs that have been described as the most feasible options, along with the alternative design in Concept 10 to see if he is interested in changing the process in a fundamental way. We will use the voice of the customer as a guide to the finalized conceptual design choice.

37  

References Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Department of Justice ADA Title III Regulation 28

CFR Part 36. (2002) http://www.ada.gov/reg3a.html#Anchor-Appendix-52467 Allen, George. Label Applicator. Label Aire, Inc., assignee. (1997). US Patent 5853530. Assistive Technology Solutions. Rubber Band Applicator (11-16-2008)

http://www.atsolutions.org/devices/rubberband_applicator.htm Avery Dennison Corporation. (11-19-2008). http://www.avery.com/avery/en_us/Templates-

%26-Software/Software/Quick-Peel-Automatic-Label-Peeler-Support.htm?Ns= Frobose, James W. Push Button Adjuster for Chair Backrest. Jasper Corporation, assignee. (1980). Patent

4221430. Garvey Products, Inc. (11-16-2008) http://www.garveyproducts.com/index.php?main_page=

product_info&cPath=3&products_id=2537 House, Bruce F. Adjustable Self-Leveling Plate Dispenser. Shelley Manufacturing Company, assignee.

(1976). US Patent 3937361. Karp, Edward C. Manual Label Applicator. Sanitary Scale Company, assignee. (1986). US Patent

4626313. Originals by Weber. Label Peeler. (11-16-08). http://www.yrret.stirsite.com/page/page/

3920328.htm Pfeffer, George B. Manual label applying template. Datafile Limited, assignee. (1983). US Patent

4369582. Suhr, Heinz-Peter, and Bernd Weinberger. Adjusting Mechanism for the Step-wise Locking Height

Adjustment of Backrest of Work Chair. Firma August Froscher GmbH & Co. K.G., assignee. (1987). US Patent 4660885.

SW Resources. Mail Plus Department. (2008). http://www.swresources.com/html/mailplus.html