Table 6 provides a summary of the deployability testing results: Table 6: Deployment Time Stages Preparation Time Installation Time Total Preparation Time Deployment Time Pop-up Tent 6 hours 15 minutes 6 hours 15 minutes 12 hours 30 minutes 10 minutes Triple Threat NA 3 hours 15 minutes 3 hours 15 minutes 1 hour 30 minutes Hail Garage NA 2 months 2 months 10 minutes Portable Tarp Tent NA 7 hours 15 minutes 7 hours 15 minutes 4 hours 30 minutes Below are the steps and assumptions made in calculating the installation and deployment time of each mock-up. Pop-up Tent Preparation: The pop-up tents will be stored in the trunks of vehicle during hail season. This is an easy storage solution and can be done over a long period of time. This …show more content…
step could take a single employee 3 minutes to place in the trunk for a vehicle. With 4 employees for 500 vehicles, this would take 6 hours and 15 minutes. Installation: Following a hailstorm warning, employees will unfold tents and position them behind vehicles. The time spent to walk the dealership and the 3 minutes it would take to take each pop-up tent out of the truck and install, it would take 4 employees 6 hours and 15 minutes to install the devices. Deployment: Once the devices have been installed at the back of the vehicles and hail is imminent, the employees will walk the lot and hit the switch on each device to deploy. This would take 10 minutes with 4 employees. Triple Threat Installation: The first stage is completed by wheeling the device out from wherever it was stored, and orienting it at the end of a row of cars. It would take two workers per device to install, taking 3 hours and 15 minutes for 500 cars. Deployment:The second step consists of two workers holding the end with the rolls of netting steady and rotating a crank that unwinds the netting. While they are doing this, another two workers would take hold of the opposite end (the end the netting is attached to) and walk it down the row of cars. Wheeling out the Triple Threat would take 30 seconds per device. With 500 cars and 4 employees, this would take 1 hour and 30 minutes. Hail Garage Installation: The Hail Garage is a permanent structure and would need to be installed by construction workers on each lot.
The estimated time to install one Hail Garage is 2 hours, and for 500 cars there would be 167 Hail garages installed. Assuming the construction crew working an 8 hour work day with weekends off, it would take approximately two months for the Hail Garage to be installed on a 500 car lot. Deployment: The Hail Garage is controlled by a motor that can be activated using a remote control. If 4 employees had to walk around the dealership and hit the remote for each garage, it would take an estimated 10 minutes to bring down the covers on the hail garage during inclement weather. Portable Tarp Tent Installation: The Portable Tarp Tent is rolled out from the dealership and placed behind two cars. This would take 7 hours and 15 minutes for 4 employees to place the device behind 500 cars. Deployment: The Portable Tarp Tent is wheeled out and cinched down to cover 4 cars. This would take 1 minute per device. With 4 employees covering 500 vehicles, this would take 4 hours and 30 minutes to deploy. Analysis, Limitations, and Conclusion Material Testing …show more content…
Analysis The material testing provided qualitative data that helped us decide the netting for our prototype. Testing showed the HDPE Crop Hail Netting would be the best material for the Triple Threat. Although it did not withstand all scenarios, it withstood the golf ball testing and most of the rock testing. The rock testing in which the netting broke exceeded the expectations set by the project definition requirement of stopping 2” diameter at 40 miles per hour. Although the Ventilating Mesh Tarp performed best, it is extremely thick and hard to fold, which would make implementation into the Triple Threat exceedingly difficult. Limitations The data obtained from material testing was extremely qualitative. Due to the DTC budget of $150, the team was restricted on what materials could be purchased and the amount of money and time that could go into material testing. Since most materials must be bought in bulk, the team worked with the other four Car Hail Project DTC teams to purchase the material and schedule testing. Due to budget restrictions and purchasing restrictions of the DTC program, the DTC Car Hail Protection teams were only able to purchase three materials to be tested. Since most of the budget was used on netting, little money could be used to invest in the proper materials needed to create ideal performance testing for quantitative data. Another limitation was the objectives of the other Car Hail Project DTC teams. Each team had different ideas and intentions on what to test, the conditions of the testing, and the amount of quantitative data needed. Since all five teams purchased the material, the material performance testing needed to be done with the approval of all five teams. Because of resource limitations and differing goals, the material testing was very qualitative and did not test what our team ideally wanted to test, such as the velocity of the golf balls hitting the net, mass of the rocks, exact tension of the nets, height of the drop, and deformation of the netting. Conclusion Material testing was used to determine the netting used in the prototype, but the material performance testing conducted was severely limited due to budget restrictions and coordination with other DTC teams. We highly suggest further testing of materials for future development of the solution. Adaptability Testing Analysis The adaptability testing showed the strengths and weakness of each mock-up in adapting to different lot arrangements. All four mock-ups covered a vast majority of the cars covered. What the adaptability testing really brought to light was the advantages of the Pop-up Tent and Triple Threat. The Triple Threat and the Pop-up Tent proved to be substantially more adaptable to different car lot configurations over the Hail Garage and Portable Tarp Tent. Limitations Adaptability testing had multiple limitations due to the scale of the process. One limitation was the scaled down car lot and mock ups. The mock-ups and ‘cars’ were scaled down to 1/60th the actual size. When scaled up, multiple problems could occur that did not come up in the idealized 1/60th scale scenario. The integrity of the mock-ups on a larger scale and the mechanics of each mock-up could drastically change if made to actual scale. Despite the limitations, the scaled testing was needed because of budget and time limitations. Another limitation was the arrangement of the 20 car ‘lot’ to test for adaptability. It was impossible to test every possible layout of a 500 car dealership lot, so tests were done on three configurations that represent the majority of layouts (straight rows, angled rows, and curved rows). The mock-up lot was then tested with light poles, using the same configurations as before. Although this does not test for all car lot arrangements and obtrusions, this test is representative of the majority of dealership lots and obtrusions seen. The interferences reported during testing were also largely qualitative and reported by the team based on how the mock-ups appeared visually once deployed in the lot and how it would ideally work. This made the testing qualitative and dependent on the team noticing all possible problems the mock-ups could face. Conclusion The testing was limited by being scaled, limited arrangements, and quantitative interference measurements; however, the testing was helpful in distinguishing the adaptability of each design and pointing out the strengths of the Pop-up Tent and Triple Threat in adapting to different car lot arrangements. Deployability Testing Analysis Deployment testing provided a general outline of the efficiency of deployment and installation of the four mock-ups. The Hail Garage, Pop-up Tent, and Triple Threat met the requirements of 2 hours set by the Project Definition (Appendix ?: Project Definition); however, the Hail Garage and Pop-up Tent performed significantly better than the Triple Threat. Although installation was not a requirement, the Hail Garage took much longer than the other three mock ups, and the Pop-up Tent and Portable Tarp Tent took more than twice as long as the Triple Threat. Deployment testing distinguished the four mock-ups. While the Hail Garage and Pop-up Tent performed the best for deployment time, they both took significantly longer to install than the other two mock ups. The Portable Tarp Tent did not meet the deployment time requirement and took a fairly long time to install as well. The Triple Threat deployment time was significantly slower than the Hail Garage and Pop-up Tent, but still met the requirement of two hours. While the Triple Threat took longer to deploy than the Hail Garage and Pop-up Tent, Limitations Many assumptions were made for deployability testing.
This limited the testing in that it only tested one very simple and very idealistic car lot arrangements. The assumptions made were for what the team thought the ‘average’ lot of 500 cars would be, but many factors could change that would in turn change the time it would take to install and deploy each device, such as: the speed of the workers, arrangement of the lot, size of the lot, number of workers working, size of the car, and distance between the cars. Another assumption made that provides a limitation is the time it would take for each device to deploy and how long it would take to install/deploy each device. The times given for installation and deployment time were estimations based on the size, mechanics and method of each device. This timing could change for the final prototype, and thus the timing is a very general estimation of how long each mock-up would take to deploy. Conclusions Although the deployment testing is an estimation of time, the timing of each devices’ installation and deployment time are very distinct from each other, helping us determine the strengths and weakness of each device in installation and deployment
time.
Nonetheless, establishing timing standards for the project, pertaining to an estimated date of completion, along with a schedule for conducting tests, is critical, according to information provided by the SANS Institute (source). For example, projects that exceed the estimated date of completion may become costly, and running tests during peak and/or critical hours may result in several technological inefficiencies for Alexander Rocco Corporation. Likewise, establishing future meetings or other form of communications for updates throughout the course of the project is also
The projections were done for the years 2014-2018 (5 years). This timetable is the one softly set by the possible new ownership group to build and resell the business. Also, after five years it was felt that the accuracy of the projections could come into question.
Our project required our car to go at least 3 meters. Our initial trials were successful because our car went 7,8, and then 9 meters. The car went 7 meters in 8 seconds with a speed of 0.875 m/s. It went 8 meters in 10 seconds with a speed of 0.8 m/s. It finally went 9 meters in 12
amount of time depending on the severity and the frequency of the instances. If not
I never wanted to leave. I truly thought my life was ending on that August day in 2010 as the Peter Pan bus pulled off the dirt bumpy road in New Hampshire on its trek back to the Bloomingdales parking lot in Connecticut. The night before, I stood on the shore of New Found Lake looking out at the horizon on my last night, arm and arm with my sisters, tears streaming down our faces as our beloved director quoted, "You never really leave a place you love; part of it you take with you, leaving a part of yourself behind." Throughout the years, I have taken so much of what I learned those seven summers with me. I can undoubtedly say that Camp Wicosuta is the happiest place on earth; my second and most memorable home. Camp was more than just fun even as I smile recalling every campfire, color-war competition, and bunk bonding activity I participated in. It was an opportunity to learn, be independent, apart of an integral community, and thrive in a new and safe environment. I recognize that camp played an essential role in who I am today.
A pit crew consists of two tire-carriers (front and rear), two tire-changers (front and rear), a jackman and a gasman. The rear tire changer Removes and replaces the right rear tire, using an air-powered impact wrench on the five lug nuts. He then moves to the opposite side of the car to change the left rear tire. The rear tire changer assists the rear tire changer by handing him a new tire that he's carried from behind the pit wall. He may also adjust the rear shock/jack bolt to adjust a car's handling then move to the other side to carry the other rear tire. The front tire changer and tire carrier does the same thing as the rear just on the front of the car. The jack man operates a 20-pound hydraulic jack that raises the car for tire changes. After new tires are first bolted to the right side of the car, the jackman drops the car to the ground and repeats the process on the left side. The gas man empties two 12-gallon dump cans, which weigh 81 pounds each, into the car's fuel cell. The Pit crew does all of this in under 13 seconds which is about the time it takes for one NFL play or how long it takes for you to walk to the fridge to get another beer. In an autopsy of the pit stop done by Sport Science they broke down the pit stop: The jack man gets to the car and has to precisely center the jack under a ¾ inch bolt raising the car before the tire changer removes all five lug nuts in about one second then tightening the new lug nuts in about the same speed. The entire crew explodes to the other side of the car to do the same to the driver’s side of the car. The gas man empties all 12 gallons of fuel in about five seconds. Just to put into comparison if you have ever changed a tire on the side of the road or even had the luxury of working in a shop it takes much longer to change one tire than these crews take to change all the tires and fuel up
The Two Methods of Camping and Which Is Better There are two ways that families or individuals camp. One way is permanent camping, and the other is transient camping. Permanent camping is exactly as it sounds. A camper is placed on a purchased or borrowed lot at a campground and is left there year-round. Transient camping is when one takes a camper with them to a campground and then takes the camper back home after he or she is done. Not all campgrounds have the option of going permanent; in fact most campgrounds only allow transient camping. There are advantages and disadvantages to both, but which is the best? Well, that's just a matter of opinion. Transient Camping Let's start with transient camping. Transient camping is extremely common
While not being hurricane proof, as almost anything else, they can withstand large gusts of wind, pollen contamination, dust and as is obvious, creepy crawlers.
Posten's Overhead Doors is a garage door contractor that is located in Pinson, Alabama. Posten's Overhead Doors is serving customers throughout Jefferson, Shelby, and the neighboring counties. This garage door contractor is a family-owned and operated enterprise. Posten's Overhead Doors was founded in 1988. Their services include commercial/residential, sales/service/installations, repair of all brands, doors and openers, replacement wood and steel panels, insulated doors, and automatic door openers. Posten's Overhead Doors proudly represents major manufacturers such as LiftMaster, DBCI, Cookson, and Amarr. This garage door contractor has radio-dispatched trucks. Posten's Overhead Doors delivers 24-hour emergency service. This garage door
b. Major roadways were cleared within the first several hours after the storm. Within the first 24 hours, neighborhoods were cleared in a timely matter
The above problems were the sole problems identified during the critique process. The average time that was spent in every aspect of the site was one day and a repetition of the process would follow similar steps and therefore no major differences in results.
Projects developed by the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) go through a planning process that includes the determination of the project’s schedule. To determine the schedule, highway construction projects are divided into several activities and the time management of these activities will define the project’s duration. In order to improve the productivity and facilitate the execution of the project, an effective planning is needed. An organized Work Breakdown Structure can enhance the project duration. However, there are certain unexpected and unavoidable factors, which can delay the project’s termination: (1) Conflicting Weather Conditions (2) Temperature, (3) Project’s location, and (4) Workers’ shifts.
more than half a dozen parking spaces, of those three are occupied by employees. As you
With Taylor’s scientific approach decisions are based on science or exact measurements. Estimations made according to convenience are inaccurate and inefficient. Each job is broken down into smaller functions, intern analyzed and timed to the tenth of a second. Through the use of scientific method the best possible way to perform a function is established and put into practice until a time comes when a better method or tool is devised.
hour and a half to assemble six pans because most of the work involved is in the setup