Aluminum A356 LED Filter Holder

Nash Anderson (Team Brown) December 6, 2010 Dr. Blair London Dr. Richard Savage

Introduction/Application
For our light measurement system (LMS), team brown has effectively designed and begun the fabrication process for prototype. Our objective was to create a LMS with the specific application of determining color values of light emitting diodes (LEDs) that could be used in Liquid Crystal Displays.

User Needs
To evaluate the spectral emission profiles of red, green and blue LEDs for the purpose of quantifying which type of display technology best matches the human eye response to normal color standard values. The accuracy of our LMS will be judged on a set of calibrated RGB dichroic filters. The 1931 CIE chromaticity values based on the ASTM E308 standard will be used for comparison as seen in Figure 1 (Red: x=0.640, y=0.330; Green: x=0.300, y=0.600; Blue x=0.150, y=0.060). This prototype will eventually go into full production to be used as a production line quality control for manufacturing LEDs so it must have repeatability (1 hour) of data factor of +/0.04 and reproducibility (5 day) of data factor of +/0.10 based on a 95% confidence interval. This prototype has been designed as a compact tabletop operation design and fiber optics are being utilized to be able to conduct chromaticity tests far from the actual spectrometer. The measurement time should take less than five seconds and samples should be able to be sw itched within a minute. Other performance goals and general guidelines for the prototype are weighted in Table I.
Figure 1. Plotted are the 1931 CIE chromaticity values based on the ASTM E308 standard of CRT Phosphors.

o CRT Phosphors

Table I. Performance goals from consumer standpoint.

Attributes
Operation Stability Ergonomics Safety Manufacturability Cost Schedule

Measurable Objective
% loss of light transmission # of uses before recalibration Repeatability +/- 0.04 Reproducibility +/- 0.10 Length of training Duration of test # of injuries vs. time of use # of parts # of steps in production Cost to produce vs. retail <$500 dollars to produce Time to produce

Weighting Factor
2.5 2 1 1 0.25 1.75 1.5

As you can see operation was heavily weighted. This is because the function is most important along with stability coming in second because the machine should be accurate and precise. Cost then came in third and schedule in fourth, because it is important to create an efficient design while also keeping it simple and quickly produced while also keeping the cost down. Ergonomics and safety were then tied for fifth because the machine is already very safe and the length of training should already be quite short because it is such a simple design. Manufacturability was weighted the least because all other aspects would are more important to the consumer, and also the production process is fairly simple and quick with most of the manufacturing taking place in the aluminum casting of the base. The aluminum casting process is relatively quick, as compared to machining, and it is also cheaper because there is not as much wasted material.

System Block Diagram

Each part to the LMS system has a specific role. The variable power source is to power the LEDs to the right intensity. The LEDs sit in the rapid prototyped ABS sample holder which connects to the aluminum base. The aluminum base and the LED sample mount align with each other and shoot the light through to the collimating lens to focus the light into the fiber optic cable which will be also attached to the aluminum base. Figure 2 shows the general system block diagram consisting of the important components of the LMS design.

Power Source (120V)

LEDs (RGB) R = 639nm G = 525nm B = 465nm 3

LED Sample Mount (ABS)

Aluminum Base

Spectrometer
(Resolution ~ 1.5 nm FWHM)

Fiber Optic Cable

Collimating Lenses

Figure 2. Block diagram of general LED LMS setup. The fiber optic is only 200m in diameter, so everything needs to be lined up very well for the light to be transmitted into the fiber optic. The fiber optic then carries the light to the spectrometer for data collection. Figure 3 shows how the lens collimates the light into the fiber optic cable.

Figure 3. This shows how the light is collimated from the LED, through the lens, and into the fiber optic cable. *Note image does not include LED sample mount, aluminum base, or the spectrometer.

Conceptual Design Solutions

Two main design ideas were picked from that were based around the same LED sample holder design. Design 1 (Figure 4) consisted of a revolver type LED sample holder where the holder would spin on a bar coming out of the aluminum base to line up the different LEDs. It also consists of two collimating lenses that would be adjustable for the different LEDs if necessary.

Figure 4. Design 1 with the revolver LED holder. The dark blue square on the upper picture represents the light blue circle below the base when looking straight on. Design 2 is the design that has been implemented for the prototype LMS. The aluminum base (Figure 5) is the main structural component of the system and has a volume of 137cm3 and weighs 370 grams.

Figure 5. Design 2 Al 356 base. Dimensions are 137cm3 and weighs 370 grams.

It will also house a ThorLabs lens holder which will drop into the groove on the top of the right view orientation on Figure 4. Only one lens is utilized in Design 2 to collimate the light and it will also be easily adjusted with the ThorLabs adjustable lens holder. The fiber optic will connect to the lens holder and continue out of the back of the base to the spectrometer. The ABS LED lens holder (Figure 6) attaches to the aluminum base as depicted in Figure 8 and has a volume of 35.2 cm3. This design creates an easy way to switch LEDs while testing, because the ABS part rotates along the pin extruding from the aluminum base and is then held in place with a set pin that will insert through the top of the aluminum base and into the ABS. The aluminum base also will align the lens holder because of the way it will be held in by a V shaped groove. This will make the lens holder sit down without rocking in the mold.

Figure 6. ABS LED sample holder. The red, green, and blue LEDs will insert into the three holes on the front view of the part. The LED backstop (Figure 7) will press in behind them and screws will hold them in while the positive and negative terminals will be able to stick out of the slits in the backstop for ease of power connection.

The light from the LEDs will enter through the circular hole in the aluminum base and into the lens holder which will create near perfect collimation of light to enter the fiber optic cable and be transmitted to the spectrometer. The LEDs are permanently held into the ABS LED sample holder by three LED ABS backstops (Figure 7), which are fastened to the sample holder with screws. The LEDs are permanently attached to each backstop because the positive and negative leads insert through the two holes in the center of the part (front view) and are soldered to permanent wire leads that are attached to a banana tip that will insert into the power source.

Figure 7. LED ABS backstop. To accurately assess which design was better a decision matrix was created and then each engineer averaged their total weights for design 1 and design 2 (Table II). The engineering groups averaged values came out higher for every attribute on design 2, because design 2 was created 2 from design 1s flaws. The entire assembly (excluding the fiber optic cable and spectrometer) is shown in Figure 8.

Figure 8. Assembly of LMS, excluding fiber optic cable and spectrometer. Fiber optic attaches one end to back of lens holder (right side) and the other end into the spectrometer.

Table II. Decision matrix between design 1 and design 2.

Design 1 Attributes
Operation Stability Ergonomics Safety Manufacturability Cost Schedule

Design 2
Group My My Group Averaged Value
9.14 8.75 8.75 9.43 7.86 8.57 8

My

My

Score Weight
5 2.5

Averaged Value
7.1143 7.29 7.43 9.14 7.29 8.29 7.14

Score Weight
7 2.5

5 2 10 1 10 1 10 0.25 10 1.75 9 1.5 Averaged Total (all group Members):

7 2 10 1 10 1 10 0.25 10 1.75 7 1.5 Averaged Total (all group Members):

76.03

86.95

Design Specifications
Power Source (Elenco XP752) 0-4 V 0-50 mA LED holder House 3 Thor Labs LEDs 1. LED-Red a. Reverse Voltage 5.0 V b. DC Forward Current 50 mA c. Forward Voltage @ 20 mA 2.0 V 2.5 V d. Operating Temperature -40 C to 100 C e. Storage temperature Range -40 C to 120 C f. Center Wavelength 639 nm 10 nm g. FWHM 17 nm h. Total Optical Power 7.2 mW @ 20mA 2. LED-Blue a. Power Dissipation 200 mW b. Reverse Voltage 5.0 V c. DC Forward Current 50 mA d. Forward Voltage @ 20 mA 3.2 V 4.0 V e. Operating Temperature -30 to 85 C f. Storage temperature Range -30 to 100 C g. Center Wavelength 465 10 nm h. FWHM 25 nm i. Half Viewing Angle 8

j. Optical Power @ 20 mA 20.0 mW

3. LED-Green a. Power Dissipation 180 mW b. Reverse Voltage 5.0 V c. DC Forward Current 50 mA d. Forward Voltage @ 20 mA 3.3 V 4.3 V e. Operating Temperature -30 to 80 C f. Storage temperature Range -30 to 100 C g. Center Wavelength 525 5 nm h. FWHM 35 nm i. Half Viewing Angle 9

j. Optical Power @ 20 mA 7.0 mW

LEDs must be removable

Must be able to be set to 1 position for each LED and hold that position
Must allow for easy connection of LEDs to power source uPrint ABS rapid prototype, 0.01 design resolution Must be smaller that 4x4x4 Base (A356 cast aluminum, ZCast mold) Max dimension: 6x6x4

Max volume of mold: 900 cm3 Max volume of part and gating: 300 cm3
Must accept ABS LED holder and Thor Labs lens holder to hold in specified positions Lens/Lens Holder Lens Holder

Diameter 1.00 - 2.50

Surface Quality 20-10 Dia. Tolerance +0.0/-0.05 C.T. Tolerance 0.05 Centering Tolerance 30 - 45 arc min. SMA fitting Fiber Optics 200m diameter SMA fitting on each end

~ 2-3 feet in length

Detection

Ocean Optics USB4000 spectrometer with SMA input Ocean Optics Spectra Suite software
Optical Resolution: (FWHM) ranging from 0.03-8.4 nm Signal-to-Noise: 3000:1 Integration Time: As fast as 3.8 ms Features: auto-nulling, 8 programmable GPIO signals, electronic shutter (tied to integration time) Spectral Analysis Microsoft excel data sheet

10

Vents and Risers

Fabrication & Assembly

Fiber Optics
Assembly: For fiber optic assembly, materials and tools were first gathered that were necessary to complete the task. The materials used are listed in Table III. Two cables were originally constructed Table III. Materials/Parts used for assembling two fiber optic cables. although only one ended up being used. A number of different tools were also needed including:

Materials/Parts Used
UV/VIS multi-mode optical fiber SMA Connector Protective Tubing for optical fiber Epoxy for Fiber Optic Connections 3 cc Epoxy Syringe Polishing pad

Qty.
2 4 2 2 2 1

3M Fiber Optic Stripping tool with a small enough (2.03.0mm setting) Heavy duty scissors

3M 6850 Auto Polisher w/

weight Razor blade

With all of our tools and supplies the optic cable down onto the table in a

Figure 9. Using the wire strippers to cut back the orange buffer tube.

first step was to tape a 2 ft. fiber straight line. The wire strippers

were used to strip back the orange buffer tube to expose the Kevlar fibers on both sides of the cable (Figure 9). The Kevlar was cut back to keep out of the way. A glass fiber was then inserted inside the fiber optic and cut so that there was 1.5 in. hanging out on each side of the cable. The black protective piece of the SMA Connector was then inserted on each side followed by the main metal SMA Connector and inserted the fiber through. Figure 10 shows the final assembly of the fiber optic cable. At this point in time all of the components of the fiber optic cable are attached they just had to be fastened, so we used the Orange Buffer Tube syringe and epoxy to fasten the SMA Connectors on by Orange Buffer Tube squirting the epoxy inside the SMA connector between the black and silver parts and taped it in position to the table to dry. Black Part of SMA Silver Part of SMA Connector Connector

11

Polishing: After the fiber optic cables were done drying, Figure 10. Final assembly of fiber optic cable being attached to the lens holder. the ends needed to be polished to reduce the amount of light attenuation due to the fiber optics. The fibers were usually hanging out of the SMA Connector over an inch so scissors were used to clip them down as close to the end of the SMA Connector as possible. The cables were then screwed into the automatic polisher and individually polished (Figure 11). They were started them off with no weight, but after a couple minutes of polishing attached a mass on top of the polishing head to put extra pressure on the fiber to speed up the Weight to be added process. Automatic Polishing Arm

Polishing Pad

Polishing Arm

Recommendations for Improvements

If we were to redesign our LMS for improvements there would be many ways for us to go about this. First, if we were to focus on cutting down on cost you

Weight to be added Figure 11. The fiber optic cable in the middle of a polishing run with no weight added yet.

Material Cost Breakdown

can see by our Material Cost Breakdown (Figure 12) that half of our money ($162.15) spent was in Z Corp mold powder/binder. If we had realized how expensive the ZCorp was compared to the aluminum we couldve better constructed our cast aluminum base in CAD for a more positive cast-to-mold ratio. The fiber optic cables were the next most expensive materials that we budgeted for. However, we ended up making two complete cables when our final design only called for one, so while we spent $66.90 on fiber optics we really only needed to spend about $30.

Figure 12. Material Cost Breakdown chart in USD ($) for LMS.

Now, for ways to improve the LMS there would be one thing and that would be to redesign the mold so that the slot where the lens holder drops into fills better and wider so that there is

room for error. On our casting we had to do a lot of machining to entirely cut off the back where the fiber optic cable screws into the lens holder because the cast would not fit the lens holder length-wise. The width also ended up being too skinny which called for minor machining so the lens holder could drop down to be able to insert into the hole in the front where the LEDs are.

12

Metallurgical Analysis of Casting

Casting Process
After narrowing the design down one final solution the base was constructed in SolidWorks as shown previously in Figure 5 (Page 4). Note that this is the part without the pour cup and risers. The SolidWorks part drawing was then used to print a mold with a Z Corporation 3-D Printer. This type of printer uses a smooth bed of silica powder (ZCast501) and a liquid binder (Zb56) to bond the powder. The mold is then baked after fabrication for 8 hours at 180C and the result is shown in Figure 13. It is printed in two halves so it is easier to break apart and able to be cleaned out before casting. However, because it is printed in halves, major dimensions and parts that need to be lined Figure 13. Our mold after the bake ready for alignment and casting. precisely should be on separate halves of the mold. This is because the mold halves are

aligned manually and held in place by packing sand as shown in Figure 14. The pour cup is labeled in Figure 14 is where the molten aluminum will be poured. Aluminum melts at 613C so the pour was made at 704C to ensure the liquid plenty of time to fill the mold before

Pour Cup

Vents and Risers

solidification. A 273cm3 graphite crucible was used to pour the molten aluminum into the mold. The pour Figure 14. Packing and aligning the two mold process was quick; it consisted of someone to open halves with packing sand inside a tray to catch the overflow liquid Al. furnace door while someone dressed in gloves, a spill apron, and a face shield grabbed the pour cup which was full with molten aluminum with tongs and quickly poured it

13

into the pour cup (Figure 15). The pour was made until the aluminum came up and spilled through the risers and then the remaining aluminum was poured into a crucible to form small blocks to be reused for future casting.

Figure 15. Pouring the molten aluminum into the mold using a graphite crucible, tongs, and heat resistant gloves for protection.

Heat Treatment
After casting the aluminum base the engineering team decided to perform a heat treatment to raise its strength and hardness. The base was cast with A356 aluminum which is Al/7%Si/.3%Mg. Silicon is added to the alloy for good castability: it allows the liquid metal to flow readily into the mold and fill thin sections and also helps it to be drawn into the interstices between dendrites to decrease porosity. Magnesium is added to the alloy for heat treating purposes. Upon heat treatment, predicted precipitates of Mg2Si will form as silicon and magnesium combine to form a new phase. Our heat treatment process was four steps:

1. Solutionize at 540C for 12 hours

2. Quench to room temperature

3. Artificially age at 155C for 3 hours

4. Quench to room temperature

Microstructures
Two samples were mounted to compare microstructure changes between the base as cast and after heat treatment. Figures 16 & 17 below show the two micrographs at 200x magnification and Figures 18 & 19 show the micrographs at 500x magnification.

Lamellar Eutectic (Al) + (Si)

Spheroidized (Si)

Figure 16. As cast micrograph of the A356 aluminum at 17. Heat treated micrograph of the A356 T6 aluminum at 200 x. Microstructure proeutecic (Al), 200 x. Microstructure consisting of consisting of proeutecic (Al) and spheroidized (Si). *No an unidentified lamellar eutectic (Al) + (Si), andetchant utilized. silicon phase. *No etchant utilized.

Spheroidized (Al) Lamellar Eutectic (Si) + (Si)

Proeutectic (Al) Matrix

Unidentified Silicon Phase

14

Proeutectic (Al) Matrix

Proeutectic (Al) Matrix

Unidentified Silicon Phase

Proeutectic (Al) Matrix

Figure 18. As cast micrograph of the A356 aluminum at 500 x. Microstructure consisting of proeutecic (Al), lamellar eutectic (Al) + (Si), and an unidentified silicon phase. *No etchant utilized.

Figure 19. Heat treated micrograph of the A356 T6 aluminum at 500 x. Microstructure consisting of proeutecic (Al) and spheroidized (Si). *No etchant utilized.

In the as cast micrograph in Figures 16 & 18 the lamellar (Al) + (Si) region does not appear to be completely lamellar. This is due to non-equilibrium cooling of the casting. In the same micrograph, the proeutectic (Al) matrix appears to have little particles embedded inside it. These particles are silicon precipitates that formed due to aluminums decreasing solid solubility upon cooling. However these are non-strengthening precipitates. The unidentified silicon phase would need further research and analysis to understand its formation and composition. The weight percentages of proeutectic (Al) and lamellar (Al) + (Si) were calculated using a lever rule from the Al-Si phase diagram in Figure 20. Aluminum A356 is a hypoeutectic alloy, therefore a proeutectic (Al) phase will Figure 20. Al-Si phase diagram1. The red line represents 7 wt. % silicon. result upon cooling. The calculated amount of proeutectic (Al) was 51.1 wt.% and the combined percentage of proeutectic (Al) and (Al) in the lamellar structure was 94.6 wt.% which leaves 5.4% (Si) phase in the lamellar structure. In the T6 heat treated micrograph in Figures 17& 19 the same proeutectic (Al) matrix is seen but the lamellar (Al) + (Si) region transformed into spheroidized (Si). Precipitates are not visible at this magnification nor are they visible by any optical microscope. To view the precipitates a transmission

15

electron microscope (TEM) would be needed. Because we do not have the resources to perform this analysis, we did a simple hardness test to figure out whether precipitates were formed. Table IV. The average and standard deviation and conversion to Brinell hardness and Vickers hardness2. The measured values were an average of six tests. The hardness tests were performed on two different scales and then converted to Brinell and Vickers hardness for comparison. Hardness and yield strength As Cast Measured (Rockwell Scale) Brinell Vickers 55.8 HRE 5.1 Aged T6 62.4 HRB 3.2 both use units of force/area. If our hardness values had units of MPa we could relate them to yield strength by the relationship: H = 3.03y 3. However, for the as cast sample we took hardness readings on the HRE scale and for the T6 heat treated sample hardness readings were taken on the HRB scale which are both unitless. The two ~115 scales both use 100 kgf (kilograms of force), but the HRE scale uses a 1/8 in. indenter ball and the HRB scale uses a 1/16 in. indenter ball. The HRB scale will therefore take less force to indent the sample because it uses a smaller indenter ball, which makes it suitable for harder samples if both scales are using the same 100 kgf. The average and standard deviations of six hardness tests for each sample is shown in Table IV. The T6 heat treated sample has a higher hardness number and it is also on a harder scale confirming that it is a harder sample. Also, the standard deviations are so small that they do not have any affect on the validity of our claim. CES values for hardness of an aluminum A356 T6 gave Vickers hardness values of 120-121 and the converted value from HRB to Vickers was 115 which is close to this range2. From this analysis the conclusion can be made that precipitates were formed during our heat treatment process.

50.0

107.9

Standard Operating Procedure

Legal Notice The information in this document is subject to change without notice. BROWN, INC. MAKES NO WARRANTY OF ANY KIND WITH REGARD TO THIS MATERIAL, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Brown, Inc. shall not be liable for errors contained herein or for incidental or consequential damages in connection with the furnishing, performance, or

16

use of this Material. Copyright 2010 Brown, Inc. All rights reserved. Safety CAUTION: a potentially hazardous situation which, if not avoided, may result in minor or moderate injury.. WARNING: a potentially hazardous situation which, if not avoided, could result in serious injury. Hot Surface: In the presence of devices with high temperatures. Always use extra care, and wear safety gloves, when working around heated components Gloves: When performing some maintenance procedures, the machine may be hot and gloves will be required to avoid burns. Safety Glasses: Wear safety glasses to avoid injury to your eyes. Lifting Hazard: Lift with two or more people to avoid serious injury. Recycle: Use proper recycling techniques for materials and packaging. ESD: Use standard electrostatic discharge (ESD) precautions when working on or near electrical components OVERVIEW Our design of a light measurement system (LMS) will evaluate the spectral transmission profiles of different filters (R, G, B) and the emission profiles of red, green and blue LEDs. Our purpose is to quantify which type of display technology best matches the responses of the human eye to perceived color values. Additionally, our LMS will provide a spectral profile of transmission or emission intensity, as a function of wavelength for the pixel illumination scheme assigned.

1.

In order to design the light measuring

system (LMS) to be used on the production line for the client, some quantitative Turn on

17

adjustable power supply/ Allow power supply to warm up and stabilize for 20 minutes.

2. holder.

Place lens assembly into the aluminum

3.

Connect SMA cable to lens holder.

4.

Connect other end of SMA to

spectrometer.

18

5.

Turn on spectrometer.

6.

Align LED wedge for Red, Blue, or

Green LED.

7.

Drop dowel pin through top bloch of

holder into hole in the LED wedge.

8. slot.

Plug (+) red lead into red power supply

Plug (+) black lead into black power supply slot.

9.

Adjust power supply to correct voltage

for aligned LED.

19

10.

Adjust integration time at top left of

Table I: LED Integration Times

Red (LED630E) Green (LED528E) Blue (LED465E)

SpectraSuite software to specifications in Table I.

3.8 ms ~ 5 ms 3.8 ms

11.

Table I: LED Integration Times

Adjust power supply to approximately Red (LED630E) Green (LED528E) Blue (LED465E)

the voltages listed in Table II.DO NOT EXCEED 50 mA. Fine tune the voltage (Red and Blue) or integration time (Green) to achieve 60,000 counts.

1.8V 3.3V 3.2V

12.
13. Data button. 14. sheet. 15.

Open excel file In software, press the Copy Spectral

ChromaticityCalculation.slx.

Paste data into column A2 on excel

Chromaticity

values

appear

at

the

bottom right of the spreadsheet.

Results & Color Analysis

Accuracy: Because this engineering group was an LED team, the calculated chromaticity values didnt match up well with the CRT phosphor values. The relative positions of the LED chromaticity values and the CRT phosphor values can be compared in Figure 21. It wasnt necessarily that the measurements are wrong or not accurate, its just LEDs dont put out the same color as other methods used in LCD technology.

Figure 21. LED chromaticity values (red) as compared to CRT Phosphor chromaticity values (white).

20

A better comparison of accuracy would be to consider Team Browns data against another team that has been analyzing chromaticity values for their own LED LMS. Values from Team Purple were obtained and plotted on the chromaticity chart in Figure 22. This chart shows that we do look like we got accurate measurements as compared to another set of LED measurements. However, a thorough statistical analysis is in order to confirm this. Each teams x and y values for RGB were compared by a 2-Sample T Test on a 95% confidence interval to see whether or not the average values for each were significantly different from each other. What was found was that all coordinates were significantly different except the Red (y) and the Blue (x). This was most likely due to both teams having very small standard deviations. This would result in values being relatively similar but still coming out to be significantly different. Figure 22. LED chromaticity values compared from the Purple and Brown teams. Precision: For precision testing, repeatability and reproducibility were both investigated. Repeatability was a short term measurement taken with one operator, one initial calibration, and in the same hour. Reproducibility is a long term measurement that takes into account different operators, different days of testing (5 days), and numerous sets of calibration. The testing method for repeatability included: Set voltage/integration for peak of 60,000 Collect spectral data, one average 5 minute intervals 5 trials per LED over one hour counts Table VI. Repeatability dataof our LED measurements. Red (x) Red (y) Green (x) Green (y) Blue (x) Blue (y) P-Value 7.60E-06 0.86 0.001 3.21E-09 0.542 8.30E-11 Table V. Statistical analysis of Brown team v. Purple Team. 2-Sample T Test based on 95% confidence. Significantly Different Yes No Yes Yes No Yes

The manufacturers specs for the repeatability data (Table VI) based on 95% (2) were to be less than +/-.04 and each coordinate was well below this goal. You will notice that Red (x) has the highest variability and this is because the voltage had to be set well below operating voltage to be sure that the spectrometer wasnt oversaturated with light.

21

The testing method for reproducibility included: Set voltage/integration for peak of 60,000 counts Collect spectral data, 10 averages Reduce voltage to null Repeat 5 trials per LED, per operator over 5 days

Table VII. Reproducibility data of our LED measurements.

The manufacturers specs for the repeatability data (Table VII) based on a 95% (2) were also to be less than .10 and each coordinate was well below this goal. The green LED had the highest variability and this was probably because it had the lowest intensity, the integration was constantly needing to be changed to get it to 60,000 counts, and the green LED was located on the loosest dowel pin fitting which could move around and constantly give different intensities.

Conclusion
We have completed a working LED LMS that can take data values with a repeatability of +/- .04 deviation and a reproducibility of +/- .10 deviation. The design was well within the given budget and suggestions were given for further savings. Therefore, through thorough statistical analysis we can conclude that our LMS did fulfill our users needs and satisfy all performance objectives.

22

Task Number

Task Name

Description

Duration (Hours)

Number of People

Understanding filter vs spectrometer Understand roles of each team member 1. Introduction to LMS Review the 7-step Design Method Assess step 1- understanding the Application 2. Tabular work breakdown structure of entire project. Review Customer Complete step 2 of the Design Table VIII. Performance Method: define measurable Requirements performance goals Assign weighting factors for the Quality Function Deployment (QFD) Q & A with Dr. Savage about the overall project Step 3 of the Design Method Identify Functional Define a system block diagram 3. Requirements How do the components of the LMS interact? Step 4 of Design Method How can the functional requirements and the Brainstorm Design performance goals be brought 4. Solutions together? What is the LMS going to look like? Sketch 2 conceptual designs Evaluate the two initial conceptual designs How realistic is the design? Is the design able to be produced Conceptual Design through available resources 5. Review (limited machining, ABS, or cast)? Complete a decision matrix to choose which design to progress with. Step 5 of Design Method 6. Detailed Design SolidWorks drawing of chosen design Turn in completed decision matrix 7. Deliverables Project plan and specifications (Gantt Chart) Casting Q & A with Dr. What is able to be produced 8. London through casting? Is this design able to be Final Design Review with 9. manufactured? User friendly? Team Cost effective? Final Design OK with Review design with both 10. Savage/London professors Initial list of materials needed for Projected Bill of Materials 11. LMS (B.O.M) Estimate cost of LMS Purchase Parts from 12. Buy the parts for the LMS B.O.M. Lens distance Predict distance between LED to 13. calculations lens and lens to fiber optic cable Assembly of fiber optic cables: cutting the protective cover, threading fiber through tube, and epoxying boot and SMA connector to cover 23 Assembly of Fiber Optic Finish polishing both fiber optic 14. Cables and ABS cables Inspect cables and adjust if

1.5

1.5

1.0

2.0

1.0

2.0

0.0 0.25 1.0 0.0 0.5 0.5 .25

0 7 7 0 1 1 1

3.0

Highlighted = Milestones Total Number of Hours for Project = 38.5 Total person hours = 110 Total cost = $4235.00 Time Management: Our engineering team couldve cut back on our labor spending dramatically by distributing the amount of people on each task better. Many task all engineers were present when maybe only one or two actually needed to be there to get the job done in the same amount of time. We could have broken our group up into teams such as a fabrication team, research team, and testing team. Each team would consist of two people instead of having 4-7 engineers present. Critical Path: Steps 1-6 must be completed first to ensure an understanding of the application. Steps 7-13 verify a viable LMS is able to be created from the conceptual designs. Steps 14-19 the LMS is constructed through casting, ABS, and manufacturing. Steps 20-33 is the testing phase of the product to verify it is an appropriate prototype for the application. Steps 24-31 allows the manufacturer (the Brown Team) to ensure the feasibility of the product.

Risk Analysis: Listed below are a series of tasks that must be completed prior to advancing on the project. With each step a solution is listed if a problem is encountered.

Task #14: Fiber Optic Cable Failure Verify transmission of fiber optic cables Reuse and readjust/rebuild cables if necessary

Task #15: Issues with Printed Mold Ensure proper placement of break open line, verify with Dr. London prior to printing mold Ensure many copies of the printed mold are on hand and able to be put on the USB if necessary Pack sand efficiently around the mold to hold in place Use a team member with controlled hands to pour A356 into mold

Task # 17: Cast Pouring Error

Task #21: Testing of LMS If problem with fiber optic cable: switch out

24

Verify voltages and current necessary for the LED

25

26

Cost Analysis
The total money spent on this project was $4,555.67. The budget for our material cost was $500 and we only spent $320.67 as depicted in Table IX. We definitely met this goal, but we couldve saved even more by increasing our cast to mold ratio and only making one fiber optic cable instead of two. Our total labor cost was $4,235. We couldve cut spending here down by managing time better and creating sub teams that had certain tasks so that engineers werent standing around watching instead of contributing to the project. Figure IX. Bill of Materials for entire LMS. Item# Description Model/Part No. Drawing No 1 2 ABS Rapid Prototyping Al 356, casting alloy Budget Casting Supply 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ZCast 501 Powder/Binder UV/VIS multi-mode optical fiber SMA Connector Protective Tubing for optical fiber Epoxy for Fiber Optic Connections 3 cc Epoxy Syringe Polishing pad Lenses (BK7) Planoconvex Optical Tube Retaining Ring, TOTAL References SM05L10 SM05RR Thor Labs Thor Labs 2 2 $30.60 $10.20 $320.67 MS403-10 6192-B 32011 Thor Labs 3M Edmund Optics 2 1 1 $2.50 $1.00 $22.50 F120 Thor Labs 2 $7.50 10260A FT030 Thor Labs Thor Labs 4 2 $38.90 $3.00 NT57068 Edmund Optics ZCorp Supplier or Fabrication Technique Dimension 2.68 in
3

Qty

Cost

$26.80 $1.52

.370 kg 1081 cm 2
3

$162.15 $14.00

27

1. Kearney, A.L., and Avery Kearney. "Alloy Phase Diagrams." Al (Aluminum) Binary Alloy Phase Diagrams -> Al-Si (Aluminum - Silicon) Volume 3. (2002): ASM Handbooks Online.Web. 1 Dec. 2010 <http://products.asminternational.org.ezproxy.lib.calpoly.edu/hbk/index.jsp>. 2. "Reference Tables -- Hardness Conversion Table - Brinell, Rockwell." Engineer's Handbook. 2 Dec. 2010. <http://www.engineershandbook.com/Tables/hardness.htm>. 3. Aluminum, 356, Cast. Material Universe ->Metals and Alloys-> Non-ferrous. CED EduPack 2010. 1 Dec. 2010.

28