The desktop computer case has always lacked the degree of mobility since its birth. Cases are also one of the biggest areas for customization for the consumer. The idea of building a case with wheels, limits the area of customization, thus the idea of building an additional component was thought of. The “cart” like design allows consumers to still choose from the wide range of cases, while also purchasing a cost effective “cart” that gives the case of their choosing a mobility factor.
Assumptions :
My design is based off the assumption that everyone has a traditional rectangular computer case, that is located on the floor.
Decision Matrix - Strategy Level :
My decision matrix was used on the first level of design, as I was deciding on what strategy I would like to pursue. Under the metrics tab I chose to use cost, durability, manufacturability, mass, and simplicity. Cost was an obvious top concern, so it is weighted the most. Durability and manufacturability determine how long the product will last while considering how easy it is to produce. Durability seemed to be slightly more important, as most of the components can be produced using additive manufacturing. The mass and simplicity of the cart are weighted the least, due to the independency of the carts weight and build.
The cart strategy excels in its cost due to the simplicity of the structure. This is best fit to mobilize desktop cases that are placed on the ground, rather than on a desk. Movement is gained by having wheels that allow the user to set their case on top of the cart and roll it around. Rubber grips are added so the case grips to the cart. The cart also is meant to be unseen when in use, therefore not having any impact on the consumers preferences with the look of their case.
The desk top slide strategy is pointed towards users who wish to display their case right on the surface of the desk. The movement of this strategy comes from a drawer like system, where the case can slide on the x-axis. The use of suction cups holds the design to the desk without physically altering the desk at all. This strategy has an extremely specific application type that also can be used only temporarily.
The permanent mount accomplishes the exact opposite type of application, as it is intended for long term use by the consumers who like to display their case in a big way. This wall mounted cradle, allows for the case to have mobility in either the x or y axis, depending on how it is mounted. Two studs attached to an airline track type mechanism hold the case and allow it to slide. This strategy is mounted to the wall and requires drilling holes in the consumers’ wall.
Once I decided my metrics and their given weights, I proceeded to use the cart strategy to center my design from. This is due to the large weight of cost, and how easy it is to manufacture compared to the other two strategies. I will now develop three cart strategy concepts, that will keep costs at a minimum and utilize fast manufacturing processes.
Concepts :
Concept 1 :
As seen in the Solidworks animation video below, this minimalistic design is nothing fancy, but rather just the essentials to giving a case mobility. This is once again the cheapest of the three designs, however, it serves its purpose.
Concept 2 :
This concept has a wide base, allowing for extra stability and a lower sitting case. This is suited best for applications where the case is taller. The wider stance and lower center of gravity captures specific needs, while staying on a budget.
Concept 3 :
Intended only for soft ground applications such as carpet, this sled design, minimizes the contact patch of the case and ground. By doing so maneuverability is granted by sliding it across the ground.
The refinement and tweaking to my original sketches, has shown me how to dive into the design process. I began thinking about in-depth problems and solutions to the different strategies I sat forth already. I was able to quickly realize why in this application the cheapest strategy is the best, and then began thinking about the many possible concepts that were just within that one strategy. I narrowed it down to what I thought were the best three, and then dove deeper into them.
Detailed and thorough. I enjoyed reading about how your project progressed. I am sorry to hear that the decision matrix took all the fun out of it. I had a similar outcome too. However, your decision matrix is very well thought out and nicely organized.
Landon you have done an excellent job at compiling all your data, your Gantt chart and Fred Park chart have nice flow and are easily visible. I would recommend explaining your decision matrix choices.