You are on page 1of 7



In B Braun 2s seventh week, the team was able to achieve several important milestones. The housing group injection molded for the first time, producing over a dozen pods, and the electrical group performed their first testing procedure. Housing Group As outlined in the previous communication, the mold cavities created last week were not useful for injection molding. The problem was due to the size of the aluminum mold plates. In two corners of the mold plates, small areas are cut away so that the molds can be inserted into the injection molding machine and be secured with bolts. The CNC machine did not malfunction in any way; instead, the section it was cutting away simply impeded on the small areas in the corners made for the bolts. This can be seen in Exhibit 1.

Exhibit 1: Presence of defect due to bolt hole cutaways Problems such as these are usually uncovered during the creation of the wax molds plates. However, because wax molds plates never need to be inserted into the injection molding machine (because they would melt under injection temperatures), they

do not have this extra material removed for the bolt holes, and, therefore, the problem was not realized. Adam was able to fix this defect by machining aluminum plugs for both sections of the mold that were affected and essentially recreating the mold. Adams solution can be seen in Exhibit 2.

Exhibit 2: Mold plates with aluminum plug fixture With the molds fixed and now usable, the housing group again enlisted the aid of John Rodgers, the PhD student in charge of the injection molding lab, to help the group create actual pod prototypes. After several hours of work, the team made about a dozen pods using ABS plastic. The team was unable to procure any PMMA plastic but was allowed to use their second choice, ABS, as there was excess in the lab. There was, however, a problem in the process. Although the front half of the pod was able to be produced repeatedly without difficulty, the back half of the pod could not. This was because of the friction between the sides of the pod and the injected plastic. This friction kept the plastic on the wrong side of the mold, the side that did not have ejector pins on it. In order to overcome this friction, a Dremel rotary grinder was used to create divots on the opposite mold half to create more friction on the other side. This pulled the injected plastic to the side with the ejector pins, and the pod half was able to be reproduced. The team now has a dozen pods that can be used for future testing. Exhibit 3 shows the two pod halves on their own, while Exhibit 4 shows the pod as a whole.

Exhibit 3: The front (left) and back (right) halves of the pod

Exhibit 4: The combined halves, creating the entire pod

Electrical Group Adam and Corrin were able to perform their first round of prototype testing this week. The prototype began with an IV bag hung approximately three feet over a table. The IV bag line was fed into the pod, which, in this test, consisted of 24 inches of Kanthal wire wrapped around a 10-inch section of IV tubing. A voltage was supplied across the Kanthal, and a thermometer was placed at the exit of the stream to measure the temperature of the fluid at the patient. The prototype is displayed in Exhibits 5 and 6.

Exhibit 5: First half of electrical groups prototype. A saline bag and attached IV line

Exhibit 6: Second half of electrical group prototype. Kanthal heating element, electrical power supply, and thermometer This preliminary test varied both the flow rate from the IV bag and the voltage across the Kanthal heating element. This was done for two reasons. The first reason was to ensure that a temperature distribution did indeed occur by varying voltage and flow rate. The team wanted to prove that different flow rates required different voltages supplied to the heating source to alter the temperature at the patient. The second reason was to show that the temperature did indeed change when the heating element was supplied. Essentially, this test was a proof of concept test. The electrical group intended to show that by supplying a voltage to the Kanthal, the saline could be warmed along its path to the patient, and that by varying the flow rate or voltage, a different temperature distribution could be seen. The data in Exhibit 7 confirms these beliefs.

Exhibit 7: Data recovered from electrical groups first prototype test From here, the electrical group will refine this test. One variation will be to increase the distance between the heating element and the thermometer to represent a more realistic distance between the pod and patient. In order to get some data that can standardize future tests, the team will take a new stance on the procedure. They will set the flow rate and exit temperature constant. From there, they will determine the voltage

required to be sent across the heating element in order to maintain that exit temperature. This will be done for a variety of flow rates. Heat Sensing Group The heat sensing group spent much of their time creating elements of the presentation to be given next week. On top of this, the progress of the group was delayed while they waited for the delivery of the thermistors that were ordered last week. The teams next step is to calibrate the thermistor, and to take the resistance it supplies to the Arduino and convert that to a temperature reading. Until the group receives their materials, no further progress can be made. Risk Assessment Once again, the team performed a risk assessment analysis of the project, which can be seen in Exhibit 8. As the team was able to make use of the abundant supply of ABS plastic in the Injection Molding Lab, the risk of not being able to purchase plastic has been eliminated entirely. Similarly, with the molds machined, this risk has been eliminated as well. As of now, the quality of the injection molding appears to be high. However, a very slight risk remains, as this could be the source of pods failing in the future. There is some risk involved with the pod halves remaining together through impact and compression testing; however, this will be further assessed once these tests have taken place. The team still holds strong reservations when it comes to implementing an electrical circuit, which is also related to adequate heating of the fluid. The initial test performed by the electrical group has lowered the expectations for feasible heating of the fluid. Future tests will help to refine these risks.

Exhibit 8: Risk assessment for Week 7

Gantt Chart The Gantt Chart, which is shown in Exhibit 9, shows where the team stands relative to its plan at the beginning of the semester. As can be seen, the first prototype for all groups was delayed heavily. However, Derek, who is in charge of managing the Gantt Chart, is considering an overhaul of the chart to more accurately reflect the teams progress. These changes would include a current standing of the project for all groups, as well as a breakdown of the expected progress for each individual group, as opposed to the expected progress of the entire team. The new Gantt Chart would, therefore, more easily identify which groups are progressing as planned, and which groups are experiencing difficulty.
Week 1 Week 2 Week 3 Week 4 Week 5 Week 6 8/26-9/1 9/2-9/8 9/9-9/15 9/16-9/22 9/23-9/29 9/30-10/6 Start-Up and Scheduling organization, assigning roles and jobs Gantt chart kick-off presentation Reviewing Current Solution recap problem and opportunity describe solution and technical feasibility finalize bill of materials finalize engineering drawings determine build versus buy considerations First Prototype describe rationale for prototype design design and build test setups and testing protocol electrical group- simple heating tests housing group- impact and mechanical testing temperature group- temperature sensing obtain materials electrical supplies (wire, multimeter, etc.) housing supplies (molds, plastic, etc.) temperature supplies (thermistors) build prototype electrical group housing group temperature group test prototype and compare to predicted results review results and how it informs next steps Midterm Review presentations notebooks and peer reviews Second Prototype describe rationale for prototype design design and build test setups and testing protocol obtain materials Week 7 10/7-10/13

Exhibit 9: Semester Gantt Chart, current through Week 7